## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=0s) Private Agreements vs. Public Contracts: The Breakdown of Societal Trust
The discussion opens with reflections on the public controversy surrounding Guo Degang and the ruptures within his troupe, pointing to how the incident exposes the deep complexity of social relations in contemporary China. A core anxiety raised at the table is that modern society is systematically dismantling private agreements and replacing them with cold, public contracts. In an ideal community, social life and professional collaboration operate on personal trust and private pacts—such as promising an editor to turn in a manuscript by 8:00 PM the following evening. Historically, even institutions like the Palace Museum functioned on private understandings: if a person pitched their services for 3,000 yuan and the counterpart agreed on that worth, a handshake sealed the bond. Today, however, everything is funneled through rigid legal mechanisms like the Labor Law and mandatory notarization, stripping human connection of its foundational integrity.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Evolution from Traditional Bonds to Modern Legalism
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the shift from traditional master-disciple trust to modern market contractual relations.
subgraph Traditional["Traditional Order (Private Agreements)"]
A["Master-Disciple / Guild Bond"] -->|"Based on Word & Loyalty"| B["Total Survival & Identity"]
B -->|"Cannot Exit Guild"| C["Internal Ethical Constraints"]
end
subgraph Modern["Modern Order (Public Contracts)"]
D["Labor Law & Legal Contracts"] -->|"Standardized Quid Pro Quo"| E["Status of a Stranger"]
E -->|"Easy Exit & Re-employment"| F["Erosion of Moral Obligation"]
end
```
The speakers emphasize that the hallmark of a private agreement is that a person's spoken word must count without requiring a paper trail. Paradoxically, this code of honor is often maintained more strictly in the underworld than in mainstream polite society, where gangsters seal bargains with the phrase, "Brothers, you all heard that, right?" When society abandons these unspoken pacts in favor of legalistic enforcement, the traditional master-disciple bond collapses because disciples can now easily exit the circle and assume the status of complete strangers. In the past, an apprentice who abandoned their guild or master could not survive in the trade; today, the absence of internal community constraints allows individuals to walk away freely, upending the time-honored precept that “a teacher for a day is a father for life.” As one speaker points out when questioning how modern disciples rationalize their departures, “What logic can you argue with your own father?”
- **Hallmarks of private agreements**: Mutual trust, personal honor, and oral commitments that carry absolute weight without legal notarization.
- **The historical guild constraint**: Expulsion or voluntary exit from a traditional trade circle meant economic death and social banishment.
- **The modern transition**: Disciples can unilaterally walk out into the open market, reducing traditional lifespans of loyalty to replaceable labor arrangements.
---
[02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=121s) The Moral Debt: Apprenticeship Traditions vs. Corporate Contracts
The conversation shifts to the collision between traditional Chinese moral concepts of gratitude and modern corporate contract culture. Drawing parallels with pop icon Andy Lau's early career struggles and personal experiences within traditional domestic institutions, the panel explores the dilemma of artists who start from nothing, achieve stardom through a company's backing, and then struggle with how to settle accounts once they become famous. In Western business frameworks, professional relationships are strictly defined by contract expiration dates—once the term ends, an artist is free to part ways without guilt. In China, however, an immense moral burden persists around the notion of indebtedness, rooted in the traditional maxim that "a favor received when one is in need should be repaid many times over."
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Dilemma of Repaying Formative Favors
accDescr: Flowchart contrasting transactional settlement with open-ended traditional moral debt.
A["Novice / Starving Artist"] -->|"Receives Support & Platform"| B["Attains Stardom & Wealth"]
B -->|"Corporate Lens"| C["Settles via Contract & Revenue"]
B -->|"Traditional Lens"| D["Lifelong Incalculable Debt"]
D -->|"Conflict"| E["When is repayment ever enough?"]
```
The speakers cite an observation from Teacher Yu, who witnessed disputes between masters and disciples in the entertainment industry where apprentices claimed they had generated enough revenue to fully repay their mentors. Teacher Yu's counterpoint highlighted the chivalrous view of formative patronage: “She said back when you were starving and couldn't even afford a meal, they fed you, and now you have to pay them back in gold?” Yet this raises an intractable dilemma: if an early life-saving favor must be repaid in gold, when is the ledger ever truly balanced? The panel notes that the debate gets hopelessly muddled when people conflate two fundamentally distinct institutions: the traditional master-disciple bond and the modern employment corporation. In a true master-disciple tradition, invoking fair exchange is impossible—much like Zhu Yuanzhang rewarding the beggars who once saved him with a bowl of "pearl, emerald, and white jade" soup. Turning to the feud between Guo Degang and his former student Cao Yunjin, the panel recalls Cao's public defense, which sought to reframe the apprenticeship as a fee-for-service transaction by claiming he paid an annual tuition of around 8,500 yuan rather than receiving unconditional charity.
- **Western vs. Chinese contractual psychology**: Western contracts rely on cold, explicit terms and clean departures; Chinese professional departures carry heavy moral debts (*enqing*).
- **The Zhu Yuanzhang allusion**: The legendary bowl of "pearl, emerald, and white jade" soup illustrates debts of basic survival that cannot be repaid through standard market equivalence.
- **The Cao Yunjin controversy**: The apprentice's public argument centered on paying roughly 8,500 yuan in yearly tuition to contest the master's narrative of benevolent, cost-free upbringing.
---
[04:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=279s) Elevating Mastership: Cultural Ethics and Spiritual Discipleship
The panel critiques the transactional framing of mentorship, arguing that the status of a master should not be treated as a debate between public and private contracts, but rather restored to the supreme ethical plane of "Heaven, Earth, Sovereign, Parent, and Teacher" (天地君亲师). When this reverence disappears from a person's heart, the essential dignity of the master vanishes entirely. In traditional philosophy, nature and heaven form our cosmological ethics, while parents and masters constitute our lived destiny. The speakers draw comparisons with esoteric traditions, such as Tibetan Buddhism, where spiritual attainment requires absolute surrender to a root guru. In those paths, whether an individual teacher has questionable personal character or falls short of perfection is secondary to the practitioner’s psychological need for an absolute guiding figure to prevent them from straying on the path of cultivation.
> “Otherwise, you won’t succeed on your path of cultivation; you’ll go astray.”
At the same time, the panel cautions that authentic mastership is neither arbitrary nor instantaneous. In authentic lineages, finding a root guru requires extensive observation, shared living, and genuine dispositional harmony before formal initiation occurs. It is an arduous process of mutual recognition rather than an authoritarian demand for submission. The table laughs over how modern commercialization has degraded this sacred bond, pointing to the ubiquitous phenomenon of dubious "living Buddhas" in Beijing's Chaoyang District who preach spiritual authority while sporting thick Northeastern accents.
- **The ethical quintet**: Traditional reverence places the teacher directly alongside Heaven, Earth, the Sovereign, and biological Parents.
- **The root guru dynamic**: Spiritual discipline often requires unquestioning commitment to a singular master as an internal anchor of devotion.
- **Chaoyang District "Rinpoches"**: A humorous contemporary reference to opportunistic, faux-spiritual gurus operating in metropolitan Beijing with heavy regional accents.
---
[07:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=426s) "Shifu" vs. "Teacher": Hierarchical Duty and Economic Underpinnings
The dialogue turns to an essential linguistic and social distinction: the difference between a modern "teacher" (*laoshi*) and a traditional "master" (*shifu*). In the title *shifu*, the character *fu* is explicitly the word for "father," establishing a strict generational hierarchy and moral authority that does not exist with an ordinary instructor. While a conventional teacher charges a tuition fee to impart a specific technique and bears no responsibility for a student's daily sustenance, a traditional *shifu* houses, feeds, and ensures the absolute survival of the apprentice. Because the master assumes full parental responsibility, the relationship transcends commercial calculations. An apprentice who lived under a master's roof cannot retroactively compute their debt in dollars or complain about petty inconveniences. As one speaker emphatically argues regarding the necessity of accepting patriarchal imperfections within traditional guilds:
> “You can’t nitpick him; you can't complain that the food he cooks is too salty.”
The panel connects this cultural ethos to the work of economist Chen Zhiwu, who argues that every traditional moral code conceals an underlying mechanism of economic reciprocity and risk management. For example, traditional filial piety (*xiao*) and the cultural demand to "raise children to provide for old age" functioned as ancient China's substitute for formal pension systems and institutional social security. Under this economic lens, traditional apprenticeships were long-term risk-sharing arrangements: the master absorbed the initial costs of feeding and training unskilled labor, and the apprentice's lifelong submission and future revenue generation served as the master's economic compensation. The conversation moves toward Chen Zhiwu's essays illustrating how manual trades, such as blacksmithing, relied on these moral-economic pacts to maintain generational survival.
- **Linguistic difference**: *Shifu* (师父) incorporates the paternal role of fatherhood, demanding total filial acceptance, whereas *laoshi* (老师) denotes an instructor in a fee-for-service exchange.
- **Parental immunity from petty critique**: Just as one cannot reject a biological parent over minor flaws, a traditional apprentice cannot audit their master's domestic habits or food.
- **Chen Zhiwu's economic thesis**: Moral doctrines and filial duties are institutionalized systems of reciprocal economic exchange and old-age security designed to manage risk in societies lacking formal welfare safety nets.
[08:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=523s) The Insecurity of the Master and the Cruelty of Old Apprenticeships
The discussion opens with an anatomy of traditional mentorship and the inherent anxiety that plagued the old master-apprentice dynamic. In the old days, an apprentice spent years performing menial household chores—fetching water for the master’s wife and running endless errands—while only being taught fragments of the craft. Masters notoriously held back their final, defining trade secret until their deathbeds, terrified that once an apprentice learned everything, they would simply leave. In one telling anecdote, an apprentice who spent his entire life serving his master finally begged on the master’s deathbed for that ultimate trick, only for the dying master to reveal a basic tip: “Just tell him the iron is hot and that’s it.” This secrecy stemmed from deep insecurity and the darker impulses of human nature, a pattern painfully evident in the old Beijing opera troupes.
In those traditional artistic circles, relationships were fiercely competitive and unforgiving. If a master taught a disciple everything and the student became a star, the dynamic instantly turned adversarial: the apprentice’s triumph felt like the master’s eclipse. To counter this threat, masters relied on strict Confucian patriarchal authority to suppress potential rivals. As one speaker frames the mindset: “I have to impose a hierarchy on you—I’m like your father, right? I can prevent you from overshadowing me, and you still have to acknowledge me as your father. But does this kind of relationship fit the way people interact today?”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Traditional Master-Apprentice Dilemma
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating the insecurity, control, and conflict inherent in old-school craft apprenticeships.
subgraph TraditionalModel["Traditional Apprenticeship"]
A["Master-Apprentice Bond"] --> B["Menial Chores & Hidden Techniques"]
B --> C["Master's Insecurity & Fear of Replacement"]
C --> D["Imposed Paternal Hierarchy ('Father-Son')"]
end
subgraph GenerationalRift["Structural Conflict"]
D --> E["Apprentice Surpasses Master"]
E --> F["Master's Triumph Becomes Master's Defeat"]
end
```
[09:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=596s) The Transformation of Education into a Consumer Relationship
Liang Wendao cautions against viewing the decline of traditional mentorship merely as a clash between ancient customs and modern contracts. Instead, he highlights a defining feature of contemporary society: the pervasive commodification of human ties, where virtually every social interaction is reframed as an act of consumption. This consumer logic has fundamentally reshaped education across all levels, from primary schools to graduate programs. Decades ago—whether during the Republican era, the Cultural Revolution, or the early Reform and Opening-up period—university students at elite institutions like Peking University and Tsinghua University regularly walked their professors home after class, lingering in their living rooms for hours of sprawling conversation. Today, that intimate intellectual communion has completely evaporated.
In modern universities, this dynamic has curdled into a transactional exchange. Students increasingly perceive themselves as paying clients, adopting the attitude: “I paid my tuition. My mom didn’t pay for my tuition for nothing.” Meanwhile, faculty behavior has shifted drastically; rather than mentoring students outside the lecture hall, the most common grievance against contemporary professors is that they pack up and leave the second the bell rings, rendering them completely unreachable. When personal boundaries are crossed today, it often manifests inappropriately—such as questionable dinner party demands or professors inviting female graduate students into book-cluttered bedrooms—rather than genuine, lifelong intellectual camaraderie.
- Modern education is reduced to a commercial service where students expect deliverables for their tuition.
- Historical memoirs from the Republican era and early Reform era recount deep teacher-student bonds that extended naturally into professors' homes.
- Today, professors are either entirely inaccessible outside of class hours or run into ethical boundary controversies.
[12:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=722s) Martial Arts Etiquette, Disillusionment, and the Impact of Technology
The panel shifts to traditional martial arts circles, exploring how unspoken codes, face-saving rituals, and social calculations historically governed the transmission of physical disciplines. Dou Wentao references director Xu Haofeng’s martial arts film *The Master*, which depicts the intricate political maneuvering of the 1930s Tianjin martial arts world. He recalls asking Xu why legendary martial artists like Bruce Lee lacked official competitive records, or why grandmasters like Ip Man operated the way they did. In the traditional martial arts fraternity, an established master could never afford to issue direct challenges himself; if a master lost a duel, his reputation and livelihood were instantly destroyed. Instead, grandmasters like Ip Man trained a top student to challenge rival schools across Hong Kong, paving the way for the master to open an academy while remaining insulated from personal defeat.
Dou Wentao reflects on how modern technology, particularly chess-playing AI, has shattered traditional romantic myths surrounding Eastern arts like Go. For generations, traditionalists believed that playing Go at the highest level was an expression of aesthetic refinement, moral character, and spiritual depth rather than pure computation. Seeing machines effortlessly dismantle grandmasters brought a sudden disillusionment, exposing that the game is fundamentally cold, precise calculation. This prompts the central dilemma: do traditional disciplines—such as Chinese medicine, opera, martial arts, and music—genuinely possess an esoteric, holistic dimension that requires the Confucian model of following a master across the world to absorb, or is much of that traditional mystique merely an illusion?
[14:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=855s) Beyond Pure Science: Innate Talent, Authority, and Betrayal in Chinese Culture
Ma Weidu pushes back against cold rationalism, emphasizing that human life cannot be governed solely by science or mechanistic logic. While artificial intelligence dominates Go precisely because the game operates on binary principles—black and white stones functioning like ones and zeros—machines remain utterly incapable of comprehending or articulating the beauty of a human dream. If a literary giant like Cao Xueqin were to take on an apprentice, the ultimate lesson would transcend technical prose mechanics. In many disciplines, raw talent and physical aptitude naturally allow a student to outstrip their teacher; an apprentice may be physically fitter, run faster, or possess an innate sensory sharpness that surpasses an antique appraisal master.
The crux of the traditional master-disciple relationship lies not in static technical superiority, but in moral order and resisting the impulse toward betrayal. Ma Weidu observes that Chinese culture contains deep structural tensions regarding loyalty and property, making ethical boundaries paramount. In a genuine master-apprentice bond, surpassing a teacher’s technical skill does not grant the pupil license to look down on them. Ma asserts that such a relationship must mirror sacred family ethics rather than a transactional corporate employment agreement: “If you believe a master-disciple relationship is such an ethic, rather than a company, you acknowledge it the day you enter the door, and you must strictly follow this system; that is culture.”
[16:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=964s) Finding Peace: The "Divine" Nature of the Master and Go Seigen’s Lesson
The discussion turns to what truly constitutes the elusive "divinity" (神) of a master when contrasted with the cold competence of an artificial intelligence. While a chess robot can calculate flawless moves from a program, it can never offer existential solace or teach an apprentice how to govern their internal turmoil. Drawing a parallel to the Buddhist story of Huike (the Second Patriarch) seeking Bodhidharma to find peace of mind, the panel argues that a true master’s ultimate function is to steady the student’s heart. When an individual struggles, tech algorithms offer only calculations, whereas a living master reshapes the disciple's philosophical outlook.
To illustrate this profound psychological guidance, a speaker shares a story about the legendary Go master Go Seigen (吴清源). A disciple had fallen into a slump, suffering a string of defeats and growing deeply anxious. Rather than offering technical adjustments, Go Seigen simply told him: “You need to have a calm mind.” When explaining what that tranquility actually meant, Go Seigen delivered an insight that resonated permanently with the panel: true composure is returning to one’s original intention for playing Go. When a person first falls in love with the game as a child, they play purely out of passion and joy, not out of a desperate, agonizing obsession with victory. A master's role is precisely to reconnect the student with that untainted original spirit.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Machine Versus the Master
accDescr: Diagram contrasting AI calculation with the psychological and spiritual anchoring provided by a human master.
subgraph MachineModel["AI & Pure Calculation"]
M1["Algorithmic Execution"] --> M2["Technical Perfection"]
M2 --> M3["Inability to Settle the Mind"]
end
subgraph MasterModel["The Master's Transmission"]
T1["Spiritual Anchoring"] --> T2["Philosophical Reorientation"]
T2 --> T3["Return to Original Intention"]
end
```
[17:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=1046s) The Craft, the Master, and the Peace of the Artisan Spirit
The discussion opens on the philosophical mindset required when facing daunting challenges, recalling how an apprentice or player must rediscover their original purity when going up against the world's best. When playing against a supreme master, the experience itself is an extraordinary privilege that others could only dream of having, transforming a perceived defeat into a moment of enlightenment. A true master does not merely instruct; they pinpoint the crucial perspective at a decisive moment. The speakers note that relationship tensions today extend far beyond traditional craftsmanship into the modern teacher-student dynamic in schools. Yet traditional craft retains an irreplaceable quality: as Professor Lu observed, genuine craft and skill do not merely comfort an apprentice—the craft itself anchors the soul and provides profound peace of mind.
Whether one is playing chess, weaving rattan, or carving wood, full immersion in the tactile reality of the work instills a deep sense that devoting an entire life to this pursuit is enough for true happiness. Reflecting on Ma Weidu's own path, the speakers joke that his heart was essentially settled by huanghuali wood, giving him his life's foundational purpose. While society constantly demands that educators and workers adopt the "craftsman spirit" and perform everything to the absolute best of their ability, people rarely interrogate the psychological reason behind it. It is not an abstract quest for perfectionism, but an act of liberation: regardless of whatever personal distress occurred yesterday—whether fighting with one's child or enduring emotional chaos—the moment hands touch the craft, the artisan becomes entirely absorbed in the present. As one speaker summarizes this mental state: “In reality, often when they are doing something, it's not just about wanting to do it perfectly; it's about being deeply focused in that very moment.”
[19:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=1149s) Structural Comedy vs. "Candied Hawthorn" Gags: Learning from Ancient Drama
The conversation shifts sharply to the artistic regression in contemporary Chinese comedy, comparing today's commercial blockbusters with classical theater such as the Song-Yuan Southern Opera *Zhang Xie Zhuangyuan* (*Top Graduate Zhang Xie*). Despite modern films grossing hundreds of millions of yuan at the box office, their comedic architecture is described as painfully superficial. Modern comedies resemble "candied hawthorn sticks" (tanghulu)—a string of disjointed gags skewered together in a straight line—whereas ancient playwrights were already engineering sophisticated, multi-story dramatic architectures with complex layers. This stark gap demonstrates that modern dramatic technique in comedy actually lags behind the achievements of 1,000 years ago.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Comparison of Dramatic Comedy Structures
accDescr: Contrasting modern gag-based comedy with classical multi-layered architectural drama.
The speakers lament that creators today are trapped in an endless whirlpool, repeating the exact same tropes and formulas seen twenty years ago. Because creators are severed from historical knowledge and the dramatic accomplishments of their own civilization, they blindly hunt for "hooks" in generic, cookie-cutter characters without mastering structural technique. Like consumers subsisting purely on fast food, audiences may get full from quick laughs on a smartphone, but the Chinese public deserves the refined sophistication of traditional dramatic banquet cuisine. Commending Chen Peisi’s theoretical efforts to dismantle performance instincts into systematic, teachable comedic techniques, the panel emphasizes the urgent need for codified pedagogical standards that can be passed down to future generations. As Chen Peisi's dramatic critique emphasizes: “Their comedies today are still just like candied hawthorn sticks—just a simple string of gags. But back then, they were already layering structures, building up like a multi-story building.”
- Modern comedic writing relies heavily on assembling linear strings of sketches and punchlines rather than developing complex dramatic suspense or character arcs.
- The loss of historical continuity in Chinese dramatic education leaves modern writers without the foundational storytelling tools mastered a millennium ago in works like *Zhang Xie Zhuangyuan*.
- Codifying comedy into systematic textbooks and analytical methods is essential to make comedic craft transmissible rather than relying on ephemeral intuition.
[22:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=1358s) Stand-up Comedy vs. Theatrical Drama and the Natural Flow of Humor
The dialogue turns to the surging popularity of stand-up comedy and crosstalk among younger demographics. While stand-up effectively mines contemporary life for topical punchlines, the speakers stress that it remains fundamentally distinct from theater. A true theatrical piece requires actors to step into costume, encounter the audience through constructed characters, and unfold across a sustained plot. Furthermore, Chinese stand-up largely borrows the mechanics and comedic beats of Anglo-American stand-up rather than drawing from China's own rich cultural and historical treasure trove. In contrast to Western writers who build on Homeric epics or Shakespeare to produce an inexhaustible supply of narrative innovation, domestic stand-up often struggles with sustainability because direct linguistic translations fail to capture native cultural nuances.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Three Categories of Comedic Performance
accDescr: Progression from classic scripted drama to contemporary stand-up and spontaneous natural humor.
The panel analyzes the fundamental difference in artistic value through the lens of repeatability: a stage play can be performed hundreds or thousands of times and retain its power, whereas a stand-up joke loses its magic the moment an audience hears it a second time. Dou Wentao notes a personal awkwardness when watching performers strain too hard to trigger laughter, drawing a parallel to master crosstalk artist Ma Sanli's famous notion that great humor should never feel forced. The group delineates three clear levels of comedic expression:
1. **Classic Drama**: Rigorously scripted, rehearsed, character-driven, and infinitely repeatable.
2. **Contemporary Stand-up**: Quasi-performative, reliant on teleprompters or pre-written topical bits, and rooted in transient stage spontaneity.
3. **Organic, Spontaneous Humor**: The highest and most natural form, exemplified by friends gathered in a living room roaring with unmanufactured laughter, or an elite improviser who can take any random prompt from an audience and instantly weave brilliance on stage.
As one speaker delineates the essential boundary separating dramatic acting from solo comedic routines: “A theatrical event must have actors in costume; you meet the audience through a character, and at the same time, there must be a plot.”
[27:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=1643s) Talent vs. Technique: Canned Laughter and the Psychology of the Punchline
The conversation opens with a distinction between two types of comedic performers: the purely spontaneous wit and the disciplined technician. Dou Wentao reflects on those rare individuals who can take the stage without any prior preparation—or command a dinner table—and speak compellingly on an impromptu topic like marriage through sheer natural charisma and presence. When asked where he situates his own craft, Chen Peisi is unequivocal about his identity as an artist: “I am the technical type.” He explains that his entire career relies on structured technique and rigorous methodology rather than random improvisation.
The panel then shifts to the mechanics of modern humor, prompted by an article examining whether the jokes audiences hear today are genuinely funny once stripped of production tricks. Dou Wentao and Chen Peisi dissect the use of canned laughter, laugh tracks, and live "laugh leaders" commonly used in television soap operas and variety shows in Beijing. Chen Peisi recalls his own experience with sitcoms, noting how an off-screen laugh leader—often an enthusiastic woman standing up to cackle even at completely flat jokes—would trigger the entire room to join in simply because her laughter was hilarious in itself.
The speakers agree that humor has an environmental perimeter where laughter functions as a contagious psychological cue. When an audience is surrounded by people laughing, conformity and suggestibility take over. Sitting stone-faced in a chuckling crowd feels socially awkward and alienating, forcing people to laugh along almost as if following a subconscious command.
- **Improvisational vs. Technical Mastery**: A spontaneous speaker can hold a crowd without a script on any prompted topic, whereas technical performers construct comedy through deliberate, repeatable formulas.
- **The Laugh-Track Experiment**: Removing sound effects, clapping, and engineered laughter reveals that many mainstream punchlines lack intrinsic comedic value.
- **Social Conformity in Humor**: Audiences laugh largely because the atmosphere nudges them into conformity; staying aloof in a laughing room feels embarrassing.
---
[30:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=1813s) The "Funny Actor" Effect and the Rigor of Comedy Training
Dou Wentao recalls his initial skepticism when attending a stand-up comedy show, initially assuming the craft was effortless because ticket-buyers arrive pre-conditioned and eager to be amused. However, a professional comedian challenged that view with an observation that stayed with him: “He said that something funny isn't just an actor saying a funny line; it's a funny actor saying it.” The panel discusses how branding transforms perception: an established comedy star delivering an ordinary line will reliably trigger uproarious laughter, whereas a non-comedian delivering the exact same words will fall flat.
When Dou Wentao asks whether live studio audiences help or hinder performers, Chen Peisi admits that he strongly dislikes them. Rather than offering emotional support, misplaced cheers and unearned applause from a studio audience induce severe anxiety and disrupt the natural timing of a scene.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Mechanics of Comedic Delivery and Audience Perception
accDescr: How audience conditioning, performer branding, and vocal mechanics interact in comedic performance.
subgraph Methodology ["Chen Peisi's Training System"]
E["Vocal Mechanism Training"] --> F["Resonance Chamber Alignment"]
F --> G["Mouth Shape & Breath Control"]
G --> H["Precision Displacement & Exaggeration"]
end
H -->|"triggers involuntary laughter"| B
```
The discussion turns to Chen Peisi’s comedy methodology, exemplified by his play *The Balcony* (*阳台*), which was later re-staged by his son, Chen Dayu. Dou Wentao notes how Chen Dayu’s performance relies on rigorous displacement and physical exaggeration rather than natural silliness. A documentary clip illustrates Chen Peisi coaching an acting student with clinical precision, likening the human voice to a musical instrument:
- **Resonance Chambers**: Analyzing the student's head and chest resonance as if dissecting the vocal anatomy with an electric saw.
- **Vocal Pathway**: Correcting an overly heavy throat sound by directing sound upward, comparing a tilted head to a blocked trumpet horn.
- **Articulation**: Demanding a flat tongue tucked behind the teeth, an "ah" mouth shape, an open inhalation, and a held smile.
---
[33:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2011s) The Aesthetics of Lowliness and the Burden of Succession
Chen Peisi explains the underlying philosophy of his comedic work, stating that a clown or comedic protagonist exists in an inherently passive state. By intentionally placing the character in an inferior, vulnerable position, the actor allows the audience to feel psychologically elevated. Analyzing this dynamic, Chen Peisi states: “My entire creative process is about playing with this lowliness to constantly provide you with it, letting you develop a sense of superiority.” Because the performer deliberately displays helplessness and debasement to cultivate a condescending posture in the spectator, society has historically categorized comedic acting as a lowly profession.
When Dou Wentao wonders whether comedy still carries this stigma in an era where top comedians achieve massive commercial wealth, Chen Peisi maintains that societal respect for comedians remains low despite their financial earnings. Dou Wentao then asks why Chen Dayu chose to pursue this difficult path. Chen Peisi attributes his son's decision to a mix of three factors:
1. A calculation that comedy offered a higher probability of success than other careers.
2. The practical advantage of family guidance and an established foundation.
3. An intrinsic sense of responsibility to inherit and preserve the family craft.
Chen Peisi reveals that he gave Chen Dayu no preferential treatment in his acting academy; in fact, he initially doubted his son possessed the requisite talent and relegated him to secondary roles during his first two classes. While peers from unrelated academic backgrounds adapted quickly, Chen Dayu required prolonged, gradual training to build his technique. Today, the two share a cohesive creative vision centered entirely on technical precision rather than subjective sentiment.
Closing the segment, Dou Wentao observes how Chen Dayu harbors a quiet admiration for his father, noting that such filial harmony is increasingly rare. Reflecting on viewer comments from his own broadcasts, Dou Wentao points out that many contemporary young people express deep bitterness toward their families. Rather than viewing parents with warmth, a vocal segment of youth feels treated as psychological punching bags, mere tools, or projections of their parents' unfulfilled ambitions, blaming their familial upbringing for their personal struggles.
[38:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2309s) The Disconnect Among the Three Educational Systems and Generational Rebellion
The panel opens with an examination of how rapid social transformation has ruptured the traditional continuity between generations. In previous eras, a person’s upbringing was reinforced by three major educational pillars—the family, the school, and society at large—all operating in harmony and imparting identical values. Today, however, these three systems point in completely divergent directions, leaving young people to navigate contradictory expectations before ultimately adopting whatever survival strategy works best once they achieve independence. This rift is further widened when young people move to urban centers, adopting lifestyles and ideals that their rural-dwelling parents cannot comprehend, often starting with disputes over perceived wastefulness.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Educational System Alignment Past vs Present
accDescr: Diagram contrasting how family, school, and society aligned in the past versus their divergence today.
subgraph Past["Past: Aligned Value Systems"]
F1["Family"] --> V1["Unified Values & Moral Guidance"]
S1["School"] --> V1
C1["Society"] --> V1
end
subgraph Present["Present: Conflicting Pressures"]
F2["Family Expectation"] --> V2["Divergent Survival Choices"]
S2["School Testing / Ranks"] --> V2
C2["Social Realities"] --> V2
end
```
The speakers reflect on the nature of rebellion, noting that generational friction is often a natural developmental phase rather than a permanent rupture. One speaker recalls a humorous childhood episode of writing a protest letter to the "King of Fairy Tales," Zheng Yuanjie, to complain about being hit by their mother. Another personal form of defiance was deliberately leaving Shanghai to attend university in Beijing simply to get as far away from home as possible, though maturity eventually brought a return to family ties. The conversation turns to the unique tension inherent in father-son dynamics. One guest shares an anecdote about an expectant father who was terrified of having a boy, dreading the severe conflict he assumed would arise between father and son, and felt tremendous relief when his wife gave birth to a daughter instead.
- As one speaker observes regarding the former unity of upbringing: “When we were young, the education we received—what our parents said, what the school said, and what society said—was all the same.”
- Highlighting how that consensus has shattered, a speaker points out: “Now, parents say one thing. At school, it's another path, and when you enter society, it becomes yet another; everyone, regardless of what they've learned, will choose what is most advantageous for their survival once they can live independently.”
[40:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2438s) Love Turned into Resentment and the 60-Point Philosophy
The discussion shifts to how parental affection is frequently distorted into excessive control and micromanagement. Instead of offering genuine warmth, parents often convert their love into bitter resentment over their child’s perceived flaws, demanding perfection and obsessing over early achievement. The prevailing dogma that a child must “win at the starting line” drives families to push children relentlessly, depriving them of play and rest. In contrast to this culture of academic anxiety, Ma Weidu shares his counter-intuitive approach to raising his son, Dayu. From the time his son entered elementary school, Ma instructed him never to bring home a score of 100 on an exam, insisting that scoring 60 was perfectly sufficient as long as he did not fail with a 59.
Ma explains that his priority was to protect his child from burnout and preserve natural childhood joy, spending weekends taking his son into the mountains, wading through springs, and climbing trees rather than drilling test papers. While contemporary critics might dismiss this hands-off attitude as irresponsible parenting, Ma insists that this choice fostered a deep, lifelong bond with his son, completely bypassing the explosive conflicts common in other households. When schools repeatedly summoned him for conferences over academic performance, Ma simply refused to attend. While acknowledging that teachers face brutal pressure from institutional enrollment quotas and standardized exam metrics, Ma argues that forcing advanced academic concepts onto brains that are not yet developmentally ready is fundamentally harmful.
- Reflecting on how parental love becomes toxic under social pressure, a speaker states: “We turn all that love into resentment—hating that they can't do this, hating that they can't do that, hating that they lack this or that, and insisting on molding them into something specific.”
- Describing his strict mandate against over-studying, Ma Weidu recalls: “Since my child was small, I told him not to get 100 on his tests once he started school. If you come home with 100, I'll spank you.”
- Defending a child's natural developmental pacing against premature cramming, a speaker argues: “Because their brains haven't developed to that level yet, forcing them into advanced math is...It makes no sense. That's really torturing the child, suppressing their natural instincts.”
[43:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2583s) Childhood Competition, Self-Reliance, and Middle-Class Anxiety
The panel examines the broader social landscape, applauding regulatory measures aimed at curbing the private tutoring industry to reduce unequal academic rat-races. Ma Weidu emphasizes his sole fundamental rule for his son: upon reaching age 18, the child had to become completely self-reliant. The panelists agree that in modern society, any able-bodied individual with sound character and basic competence can find employment and earn a living without depending on family connections or elite credentials, even if it does not immediately afford five-star luxury. Ma illustrates this principle by noting that when his son returned from studying abroad and asked for help finding a job, Ma only provided an introduction and refused to intervene any further, leaving the rest entirely to his son's own abilities.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Class Disparity in Educational Anxiety
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how anxiety concentrates primarily in the middle class compared to the upper and lower classes.
subgraph Elite["Elite Class"]
A1["Secure Assets"] --> A2["Less Anxious Acceptance"]
end
subgraph Middle["Middle Class (Most Anxious)"]
B1["Fear of Downward Mobility"] --> B2["Fierce Academic Competition"]
B2 --> B3["Pushing Children Beyond Limits"]
end
subgraph Bottom["Lower Class"]
C1["Pragmatic Survival"] --> C2["Acceptance of Circumstances"]
end
```
This leads into an analysis of middle-class anxiety, which the panel identifies as the driving engine behind modern competitive parenting. Unlike the ultra-wealthy or the working-class poor—both of whom tend to accept their realities without crippling status panic—the middle class is haunted by the terror of downward mobility. Middle-class parents demand that their children outshine them in wealth and status, an expectation Ma characterizes as a dangerous trap that pushes families into a dead end. Looking at mature post-industrial societies such as Japan, the speakers note that the fever of ruthless competition eventually subsides, allowing ordinary workers to earn their wages and live balanced, content lives without perpetual panic.
- Explaining the psychological engine behind social rat-races, a speaker observes: “The parents who are the most anxious in society right now are actually the middle class. Why is that? They are most afraid that their children will have a worse life than them.”
- Questioning the relentless pressure across generations, Ma Weidu asks: “If each generation must be better than the one before, you’re just pushing yourselves into a dead end, aren't you? Once you reach the peak, you’re just waiting for the fall.”
- Summarizing the importance of psychological equilibrium, a speaker asserts: “If your mindset isn't balanced, you can’t do anything well.”
[46:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2766s) Parental Expectations, True Education, and the Yunnan Mountain School
The conversation culminates in a critique of how extreme parental expectations frequently violate the boundaries of genuine care. Driven by rigid social milestones, parents demand that their offspring attend top universities, secure stable civil or corporate jobs, and marry and reproduce young, sometimes even threatening to sever familial relations if these demands are unmet. The speakers argue that such parents fundamentally fail to understand the life process, mistakenly believing that high test scores alone determine a person's worth and destiny. Instead, a well-rounded human being—equipped with emotional resilience, social intelligence, and physical health—can only be nurtured in a balanced, low-stress environment.
True education, the panel argues, is intended to prepare an individual to enter society and fulfill meaningful social responsibilities rather than merely chasing elite compensation. When society ranks jobs into rigid hierarchies and disparages ordinary labor, immense psychological distress is created. At the same time, because society is evolving so quickly, education still represents a vital path of upward mobility for underprivileged communities. To illustrate this duality, a speaker introduces their visit to a remote middle school tucked away in the mountains of Yunnan, an institution participating in the well-known "screen changes destiny" project. While urban observers might initially look at these rural students doing endless practice exam problems and feel pity for their grueling routine, the initiative represents their only tangible opportunity to alter their life course.
- On the unhealthy pressure parents place on their children, a speaker remarks: “Say, why do I feel that nowadays, some parents have such intense and unusual expectations for their children? It's so intense that, as you said, you start to wonder if it has gone beyond the bounds of love.”
- Criticizing the obsession with exam scores over holistic development, a speaker states: “They have no understanding of the life process; they just think that getting high scores can change everything, but that's not how it works.”
- On the distorted societal valuation of work, a speaker notes: “In terms of social responsibility, we all tend to think that a "decent" job with high pay is what matters, but that doesn't necessarily bring happiness. When society creates these hierarchies and classifies people into different tiers, the pressure becomes immense, as people feel their job is inferior to another's.”
[57:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=3436s) Craft Over Market: The Loneliness of Dadao Comedy and Structural Comedy
The discussion turns to the divergence between commercial theater and genuine stagecraft. Many contemporary stage productions cater neither to general audiences nor to the broader commercial market, instead becoming purely insular artistic pursuits. Dou Wentao recalls an interview from years prior where Chen Peisi confessed that his Dadao Comedy theater felt solitary, as though he had no true peers or rivals. Chen clarifies that this isolation was never about market share, but rather about the craft itself and the lack of peers with whom he could exchange artistic ideas. When asked whether popular commercial comedy outfits like Mahua FunAge constitute rivals, Chen rejects the premise: “The market is too big. Our two companies are practically negligible and can be ignored. Even the government's industry and commerce departments can ignore us; what's the point of counting two fools?”
Dou points out a defining trait of Chen’s personality: he made a professional choice that few in the industry would ever make. At one point, performing solo earned Chen significantly more income than his entire theater troupe combined. Chen explains that repeating successful solo work offered no challenge at all; once a piece is accepted and makes money, continuing to perform it turns an artist into nothing more than an assembly-line money-printing machine with all the joy stripped away. Addressing teasing remarks from old-timers that he is notoriously frugal, Chen laughs it off, remarking: “More importantly, I love doing this. I love what I’m working on right now.” Because passion takes precedence, money inevitably comes second.
This dedication translates into a distinct form of fulfillment through mentorship. Chen takes immense pride in teaching young performers how to earn an honest living solely through theater box office receipts—grounded in rigorous stage discipline rather than the fleeting fame of pop idols. He recounts how two of his students in Shanghai recently directed a British structural comedy, noting: “I mean, if you’re going to direct structural comedy, you have to come through my door. There's nowhere else to go.” For Chen, the mastery and transmission of structural comedy represent an invaluable form of human capital.
- Chen Peisi's solo performance earnings once far outstripped the total revenue of his entire theater troupe.
- Mahua FunAge and Dadao Comedy are viewed not as bitter rivals, but as two tiny entities within an immense, largely untapped market.
- Two students trained by Chen successfully staged a British structural comedy in Shanghai, validating his pedagogy.
---
[01:00:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=3635s) Cultural Transmission and the Shift in Father-Son Dynamics
The panel reflects on the preservation of specialized craftsmanship throughout history. In ancient times, invading armies specifically plundered skilled artisans because these craftsmen embodied living civilizational achievements. Whether weaving bamboo or firing teapots, traditional artisans did not seek sudden fortune; they simply carried out their fathers’ expectations, perfecting a single trade so their descendants would never go hungry. The speakers lament how countless traditional crafts and cultural lineages were severed over centuries, not because families refused to pass them down, but due to ruthless historical disruptions and systemic prohibitions.
This discussion of lineage transitions into the complex, shifting dynamics between fathers and sons. The speakers observe that father-son relationships often endure a phase of severe, combative tension during youth and middle age. Dou Wentao recalls that in his thirties and forties, his arguments with his father were so fierce that his mother suffered heart palpitations just watching them clash. Yet as the years pass and the father reaches eighty, that animosity dissolves entirely. Dou reflects on seeing his elderly father now resembling a flickering candle in the wind, whose brain has begun to atrophy to the point where, after two weeks in Beijing, he has forgotten what his home in Shijiazhuang looks like. At this stage of life, the previous resentments disappear, replaced by an overwhelming awareness of the elderly parent’s fragility.
---
[01:02:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=3755s) Preserving Dignity: Caring for Aging Parents and the Laundry Dilemma
Elderly parents retain a deep-seated pride that makes accepting help extraordinarily difficult. Dou Wentao recalls discussing this with director Ann Hui, who explored elder care in her film *A Simple Life* while living with her own mother. When Dou asked Hui what message she had for older people, she offered a pointed observation: “She said that when people get old, they must accept help from the young.” At the time, Dou could not fully comprehend why seniors would resist assistance. However, caring directly for his own father revealed that stubbornness often masks a desperate attempt to protect one's dignity; unless faculties fail completely, an elderly parent will avoid spending their children's money or feeling like a burden.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Father-Son Role Reversal Cycle
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the psychological and practical shifts in parent-child dynamics from youth to old age.
subgraph EarlyStage["Youth & Middle Age"]
A["Youthful Rebelling & Conflict"] --> B["Intense Clashes Over Independence"]
end
subgraph LateStage["Parental Aging"]
C["Physical Decline & Brain Atrophy"] --> D["Pride & Fear of Burdening Children"]
D --> E["Parent Regresses to Childlike State"]
end
subgraph CaregiverShift["Role Reversal"]
E --> F["Child Takes Total Responsibility"]
F --> G["Sudden Sense of Maturity & Caregiving"]
end
EarlyStage --> LateStage
```
Dou recounts a poignant domestic misunderstanding regarding laundry. Noticing his father adamantly insisting on hand-washing his own clothes rather than using the washing machine, Dou repeatedly urged him to combine their loads to save water and electricity. After two days of gentle nagging, his father suddenly confessed his true motive: “I know you young people think old people are dirty and smell like old age, so you don't want to mix your things with ours.” The revelation left Dou heartbroken, exposing the deep sensitivity underlying an aging parent’s self-esteem.
This generational friction is equally evident in education. Dou recalls hosting an educational television program for CCTV featuring roughly one hundred parents seated directly opposite one hundred children. The physical posture of the two groups revealed the true power dynamic:
- Over a hundred parents leaned forward anxiously, occupying the vulnerable, appeasing position.
- The children leaned back nonchalantly, emotionally detached.
- Whenever a child raised their voice, the parents hesitated to make a sound, illustrating how societal tensions render parents virtually powerless during their children's rebellious years.
---
[01:05:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=3930s) Becoming the Anchor: Chen Peisi on Chen Qiang's Illness and Growing Up
The conversation shifts to the profound role reversal that occurs when a parent reaches the twilight of life. Chen Peisi and Dou Wentao agree that caring for an elderly parent requires a delicate balance: while one must be tender and meticulous, one must also stand firm and overrule the parent's stubbornness when it jeopardizes their well-being, effectively treating them like a headstrong child.
Chen Peisi reflects on caring for his father, legendary actor Chen Qiang. Both of Chen’s parents had enjoyed exceptional physical health throughout their lives, rarely falling ill, which led Chen to assume during his earlier years that he would never have to shoulder the burden of elder care. That illusion shattered when Chen Qiang suffered a critical medical emergency—a cerebral infarction (stroke). Facing his father's critical state in the hospital marked a profound psychological turning point: “When he was lying there, I genuinely felt, 'Oh, all the burdens are on me now.' Even for the old man, I had to take charge of everything and make decisions on his behalf.”
Stepping into the role of the ultimate decision-maker made Chen realize that he had suddenly matured to another level. The discussion ends on a reflective note as the panel ponders whether this sense of duty can be expected from the next generation, observing that contemporary parents increasingly profess that they expect nothing from their own children.
对话从现代独生子女面临的现实养老困境切入。嘉宾们探讨了如今单凭一个孩子来养老是极不现实的，与过去多子女家庭的照料模式形成了鲜明对比。以往家里有两三个兄弟姐妹，大家分担照护老人的责任还能应付得过来；但面对独生子女家庭时，仅凭一个人根本无法做到一对一的全方位照护。正如席间所感慨的：“Unlike us, we had three siblings, right? So, taking care of the elderly, they could manage it. But with just one person, how can you take care of them? Right? You just can't take care of them one-on-one.”
话题随即自然转向下一代的家庭教育，探讨儿子大宇（Dayu）是否继承了老一辈的育儿理念与家风。谈及第三代时，长辈流露出欣慰与开明的心态，表示现在的孙辈们成长得非常快乐、自由自在，每个孩子都有属于自己的鲜明个性与小脾气，而这恰恰被视作一种健康且充满生机的状态。以往人们总潜意识地认为老一辈的家教必然极其严苛古板，但如今细细回味才发觉，老一代人的育儿与相处方式实则蕴藏着通透的生存智慧：“Yeah, I used to think the older generation was very strict, I don't know where I got that impression, but now it seems not, they were actually very wise.”
在艺术与表演方面，技法是千变万化、博采众长的，可以向形形色色的人求教融合，但行事的底层逻辑与做人做事的规矩才是最根本的底色。正如其深有感触所总结的：“Another thing is, you see, my father's generation, the education he gave me, what influenced me the most from him was what? His work ethic; he didn't teach me performance techniques, but methods of work. Regarding performance, he told me I could learn this from one person and that from another; it's ever-changing and multifaceted.” 这份传承强调了比起外在多变的技巧，做事的态度与品格才是代际流传中最核心的宝贵财富。
> [43:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws-Fk0JiWqw&t=2583s) If each generation must be better than the one before, you’re just pushing yourselves into a dead end, aren't you? Once you reach the peak, you’re just waiting for the fall. — 马未都
[49:47] 陈佩斯: 压迫只能出畸形，你何必非得压迫呢？压迫出来的全是歪瓜劣枣。
[43:03] 马未都: If each generation must be better than the one before, you’re just pushing yourselves into a dead end, aren't you? Once you reach the peak, you’re just waiting for the fall.
Original transcript
[0:00] Yes, I actually wanted to write an
[0:02] article about the Guo Degang incident,
[0:03] but I never got around to it. It just
[0:05] goes to show how complex social
[0:07] relations are. Let's start with the
[0:09] first level. And what is the first
[0:11] level? It's that in our society today
[0:12] —and this is something I'm
[0:13] particularly worried about—we are
[0:15] replacing private agreements with
[0:16] public contracts, which is the most
[0:18] terrifying thing. Ideally, society
[0:19] should function on private agreements.
[0:21] For instance, if I tell Teacher Yu, "
[0:23] I'll hand in this draft tomorrow," what
[0:25] does that mean? I'm making a private
[0:27] agreement to be with you by 8 PM
[0:28] tomorrow; that's a private agreement.
[0:31] >> Why insist on signing a contract and
[0:33] getting it notarized? I can't stand
[0:35] that kind of hassle. It was the same at
[0:37] the Palace Museum in the past. To get
[0:39] to the point, if I wanted to earn 3,000
[0:41] yuan, I'd come to Wendao to pitch
[0:43] myself. If Wendao thought I was worth
[0:45] 3,000, he’d keep me. That was a
[0:47] private agreement between us. Now, that
[0:49] doesn't work; we have Labor Law. You
[0:52] know, we have to follow Labor Law.
[0:54] >> Private agreement is a very important
[0:56] hallmark of human connection. A typical
[0:58] feature of a private agreement is trust
[1:00] —your word must count, without
[1:02] needing written proof. Oh, how many
[1:04] people actually keep their word
[1:05] nowadays?
[1:06] >> The underworld keeps its word.
[1:08] >> Exactly, nowadays even the "upright"
[1:09] world doesn't keep its word.
[1:11] >> Why, what is the most common phrase
[1:13] said in the underworld? Once terms are
[1:15] set, someone immediately says, "
[1:16] Brothers, you all heard that, right?"
[1:18] What does that mean? Your word must
[1:20] count.
[1:20] >> So, once private agreements are
[1:22] entirely replaced by public contracts,
[1:24] society loses its foundation. But why
[1:26] can't master-disciple relationships in
[1:28] today's society hold onto that sense of
[1:30] loyalty or duty? It's because it's so
[1:33] easy for a disciple to enter the status
[1:35] of a stranger: "I'm done with your
[1:37] circle. If I can't make it here, I'll
[1:39] just leave." That wasn't possible in
[1:41] the past.
[1:41] >> Why wasn't it possible in the past?
[1:43] >> Because back then, if you left the
[1:44] circle, you couldn't survive.
[1:46] >> Then why can they survive now? Why can
[1:47] they survive now? That is the core of
[1:49] the issue.
[1:50] >> It's still about this society—there
[1:51] are no internal constraints.
[1:53] >> No internal constraints. There was a
[1:55] simple saying in the past that everyone
[1:56] knew: "A teacher for a day is a father
[1:58] for life."
[1:59] >> Right? What logic can you argue with
[2:00] your own father?
[2:01] >> But I feel this extends even to the
[2:03] relationship between individuals and
[2:05] companies today. For example, I used to
[2:07] be in a place with very strong
[2:08] traditional Chinese characteristics.
[2:10] You know, if you look at all the
[2:12] conflicts now, including Andy Lau when
[2:14] he first debuted, there isn't one
[2:16] person who hasn't faced this
[2:18] contradiction: it's true, I started
[2:20] with nothing.
[2:20] >> So, I am always in a relationship with
[2:22] a company that made me famous,
[2:24] >> and after becoming famous,
[2:26] >> how do we settle the accounts?
[2:27] >> Do you have a contract?
[2:28] >> No, if you follow the contract,
[2:30] strictly speaking, legally, Westerners
[2:32] are quite cold, right? Regardless of
[2:34] that, we agreed on this, and when the
[2:35] contract expires, I’ll part ways and
[2:37] move on to better things. But, in China
[2:39] , I’ve found, including myself, that
[2:41] the moral burden is real. You see,
[2:45] it’s not just a matter of a contract;
[2:47] in China, there’s this idea that "
[2:49] without them, I wouldn't be here." They
[2:52] supported me back then, so how do we
[2:54] account for that favor? Right, the
[2:56] highest moral standard is "a favor
[2:58] received when one is in need should be
[3:00] repaid many times over." You know, for
[3:02] instance, take that beautiful woman we
[3:04] know, Yu-laoshi, I found she has a
[3:06] certain moral viewpoint, especially
[3:08] after seeing conflicts between masters
[3:10] and disciples in the entertainment
[3:11] industry. She heard a disciple say, "
[3:14] I've paid them back enough, right?""
[3:16] I’ve earned money for them, that is,
[3:18] that is what...""How much money, how...
[3:20] " just going on like that. I noticed
[3:22] Yu-laoshi, as an observer, she said.
[3:26] >> She said back when you were starving
[3:28] and couldn't even afford a meal, they
[3:29] fed you, and now you have to pay them
[3:31] back in gold? See, this is also a kind
[3:35] of chivalrous perspective. But, can you
[3:38] really say that if I have to pay in
[3:40] gold, when is it ever enough?
[3:43] >> The problem is, you're confusing things
[3:45] now; you've lumped two separate matters
[3:47] into one. The first matter is
[3:48] master-disciple, the second is a
[3:50] company; these are completely different
[3:52] concepts. Between master and disciple,
[3:55] if you accept the old tradition that "a
[3:57] teacher for a day is a father for life,
[3:59] " then you cannot speak of contracts or
[4:01] quid pro quo. How can I talk about fair
[4:04] exchange with you? Just look at Zhu
[4:06] Yuanzhang; when he drank that bowl of "
[4:08] pearl and jade" soup, he eventually put
[4:10] out a notice to find those two people,
[4:12] right?
[4:13] >> The way one repays that cannot be
[4:15] measured by a standard of fair exchange
[4:17] . Now, for example, take what Cao
[4:19] Yunjin said—of course, the master and
[4:21] disciple tell different sides of the
[4:23] story—but according to his earliest
[4:25] article, he claimed his master didn't
[4:27] support him for free, that he paid
[4:29] tuition, like 8,500 a year.
[4:31] >> This speaks to the fact that Chen
[4:33] Mucheng was originally your master. If
[4:35] you say he’s not a master, and I just
[4:37] joined a company, then one might say
[4:39] >> No, Ma Yan, I think your perspective
[4:40] here is a bit problematic; it
[4:42] shouldn’t be a matter of public or
[4:44] private contracts, but rather elevating
[4:45] the position of "master" to the ethical
[4:47] level of "Heaven, Earth, Sovereign,
[4:49] Parent, and Teacher." Because this
[4:51] ethic depends on whether or not it
[4:53] exists in your heart and mind. If
[4:55] it’s gone, then there is no dignity
[4:57] left for the master. Hmm.
[4:59] >> I feel that throughout a person's life,
[5:01] there is that ethic—Heaven is our
[5:03] ethic, Earth is our ethic, and nature
[5:05] is our ethic.
[5:06] >> Then there are family and masters; in
[5:08] the past, they said a teacher is like a
[5:09] father figure—that is your destiny.
[5:13] >> There is something quite profound in
[5:15] what you’re saying about culture; the
[5:17] differences between Western and Eastern
[5:19] cultures, and even looking at Buddhism,
[5:21] right? I don’t really understand that
[5:24] much. It’s just that when we talk
[5:26] about the "Way of the Master," this "
[5:28] master" seems to play an exceptionally
[5:30] important role in your success. You see
[5:32] why? To the point where I’ve heard
[5:34] some practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism
[5:36] say that you must…
[5:38] >> You must commit to a single guru.
[5:41] >> Now, of course, there’s a question;
[5:43] as some say, aren't some gurus just
[5:45] scoundrels? Some gurus seem to have
[5:47] questionable character, right?
[5:49] >> According to their theory, these are
[5:51] two separate issues. Whether the master
[5:54] is worthy of being a master is one
[5:56] thing, but even if they aren't, it
[5:58] seems that on the path of cultivation,
[6:00] there must be such a supreme presence
[6:02] —you must recognize this "master."
[6:05] >> Otherwise, you won’t succeed on your
[6:06] path of cultivation; you’ll go astray
[6:08] .
[6:09] >> Then you’re in trouble. It’s like,
[6:11] "I love my teacher, but I love the
[6:12] truth more." If the master doesn't
[6:14] represent this, then for Tibetan
[6:16] Buddhism...
[6:16] >> He has practiced it; he has cultivated
[6:18] it. I haven't studied Tibetan Buddhism,
[6:20] but I know that this is how it is. It
[6:24] takes effort before one finds their
[6:26] root guru.
[6:29] >> It’s not just any teacher; you have
[6:30] to observe them from the side, even for
[6:32] a long time.
[6:35] >> That they are worthy of being a teacher
[6:36] .
[6:37] >> And then, after a period of spending
[6:39] time and learning together, you find
[6:41] that your hearts and minds are truly in
[6:43] sync. He can resolve your dispositional
[6:45] issues. When you interact with him,
[6:47] there is a process of mutual
[6:48] recognition between teacher and student
[6:50] . It’s not just that I’m the master
[6:51] , so you must accept this methodology;
[6:53] one must go through a formal process to
[6:55] be acknowledged as a disciple—it's
[6:57] not that simple. But nowadays, because
[6:58] of the so-called "living Buddhas" in
[7:00] Chaoyang District, things have become a
[7:02] bit chaotic, you know?
[7:04] >> They all speak with a Northeastern
[7:05] accent.
[7:06] >> The situation is like this. I was just
[7:08] pondering why Lao Qiao couldn't explain
[7:10] it clearly. First, when we say "Shifu"(
[7:12] master), the "fu" is the same as "
[7:13] father"—it’s not the generic "shifu
[7:15] " you’d call a repairman on the
[7:17] street. It’s the "father" character.
[7:18] A teacher (laoshi) is a completely
[7:20] different path.
[7:21] >> Right? With a teacher, you can talk
[7:23] about a fair exchange—you pay me, and
[7:25] I provide instruction. But because "
[7:26] Shifu" includes the father character,
[7:28] there is a sense of hierarchy and order
[7:30] . How is a Shifu different from a
[7:31] teacher? Both teach you a skill, but a
[7:33] teacher doesn't care about your
[7:34] survival, whereas a Shifu does. In the
[7:36] past, you lived in your Shifu’s house
[7:37] . Forget about how much money you paid;
[7:39] your money wasn't worth the cost of
[7:41] that mentorship, right? It certainly
[7:42] wasn't worth it. If you were wealthy
[7:44] back then, would the money you gave the
[7:46] Shifu even matter? Of course not. This
[7:49] relationship shouldn't be about
[7:51] transactional exchange. If we are
[7:55] talking about the traditional
[7:56] Shifu-disciple bond, you no longer
[7:58] discuss compensation. You can’t
[8:01] nitpick him; you can't complain that
[8:03] the food he cooks is too salty. If you
[8:04] go around finding fault with your
[8:06] master, where does it end? You have to
[8:08] accept your father’s flaws. I truly
[8:09] believe this is a social rule that must
[8:11] be upheld; if it isn't, our society
[8:13] will be even more doomed. You know,
[8:15] there’s this economist named Chen Zhi
[8:17] . I found that he has a research
[8:20] perspective suggesting that behind
[8:22] every moral doctrine, there is a form
[8:24] of exchange—think about that term—a
[8:26] reality of mutual compensation. For
[8:28] instance, the idea of raising children
[8:29] to provide for old age; he believes
[8:31] that Chinese filial piety is actually
[8:33] rooted in the fact that we lacked
[8:34] pension security in ancient times,
[8:36] right? Similarly, I recall a short
[8:38] essay written by Professor Chen. I
[8:41] heard him write about a blacksmith
[8:43] teaching an apprentice. The apprentice
[8:45] would constantly do chores for him,
[8:47] fetch water for the master's wife, and
[8:49] work for years, yet only learned a
[8:51] little bit. There was always one final
[8:54] technique he wouldn't teach, because
[8:56] once he did, the apprentice would stop
[8:58] working for him, right? You have to
[9:00] keep you around, all the way until the
[9:02] very end, until death is near. The
[9:04] apprentice says, "I've served you my
[9:06] whole life, you must finally teach me
[9:08] that last move." The master replies, "
[9:11] Just tell him the iron is hot and
[9:13] that’s it." It’s about him—
[9:16] actually, you know, it’s a sense of
[9:18] insecurity. I feel that back in the day
[9:21] , I heard so much...actually, we
[9:23] sometimes like to think the best of
[9:24] people, but human nature has a very
[9:26] dark side. The relationships among
[9:29] those Beijing opera actors in the old
[9:31] days...
[9:31] >> It was truly cruel, indeed very cruel.
[9:35] It’s like the entertainment industry
[9:36] today; once I teach you everything and
[9:38] you become a star,
[9:40] >> if you become a star, your success
[9:42] becomes my failure. So, what am I
[9:44] supposed to do? I have to impose a
[9:46] hierarchy on you—I’m like your
[9:48] father, right? I can prevent you from
[9:50] overshadowing me, and you still have to
[9:51] acknowledge me as your father. But does
[9:53] this kind of relationship fit the way
[9:55] people interact today?
[9:56] >> I think it’s easy for us to simplify
[9:58] this into an opposition between ancient
[10:00] and modern, or private morality versus
[10:02] public contracts. It’s not that
[10:04] simple, not that simple. We also need
[10:06] to notice another feature of modern
[10:08] society; the change in teacher-student
[10:10] relationships involves something very
[10:12] important: consumption.
[10:13] >> Mmh.
[10:14] >> We interpret all social relationships
[10:16] as a form of consumer relationship. So
[10:19] today, your relationship with your
[10:20] teachers at school—we’ve expanded
[10:22] it from master-apprentice to general
[10:24] teacher-student, from elementary school
[10:26] to university and graduate school—
[10:28] it’s all seen as a consumer
[10:30] relationship now. So look at the state
[10:32] of universities today, and compare them
[10:34] to universities 20 years ago, not to
[10:36] mention those during the Republican era
[10:38] . When we read the records or notes of
[10:41] writers from the Republican era today,
[10:43] we often come across this perspective.
[10:45] Even just during the early Reform and
[10:47] Opening-up period, or even the Cultural
[10:49] Revolution, you see many students from
[10:51] Peking University or Tsinghua
[10:53] University recalling how, after class,
[10:55] they would chat with their teachers all
[10:57] the way home.
[10:58] >> Then they would accompany their
[10:59] teachers home,
[11:00] >> and the teacher would keep them there
[11:02] to chat about this and that. These
[11:04] people aren’t far off; some of those
[11:06] teachers are still alive.
[11:07] >> Right.
[11:08] >> Does that still happen today? It
[11:09] doesn’t happen today. What is going
[11:11] on today?
[11:11] >> Professors asking female students—yes
[11:13] , yes, exactly—not just to visit
[11:15] their homes, but to go into their
[11:16] bedrooms and sit on their beds, right?
[11:18] Saying things like, "Look, there are
[11:20] too many books, no place to sit, just
[11:21] sit on the bed, okay?" I’ve seen a
[11:23] professor at a dinner table tell his
[11:24] female graduate student to sit right
[11:26] there, right next to him—I saw it
[11:27] with my own eyes while eating at the
[11:29] same table. I said, "Why don't you sit
[11:31] by me?" You're just not a professor. So
[11:33] , look at how things are now. Nowadays,
[11:36] the way students feel about their
[11:38] teachers is more like, "I paid my
[11:39] tuition.""My mom didn't pay for my
[11:42] tuition for nothing," that's how they
[11:44] see it. And as for teachers, the most
[11:46] common complaint against university
[11:47] professors isn't about them acting
[11:49] inappropriately, but what? The teacher
[11:51] leaves immediately after class.
[11:53] >> You absolutely cannot find them.
[11:54] >> In the past, you’d often hear about
[11:56] students visiting a teacher's home
[11:58] together to ask questions or study;
[12:00] where do you see that now? This
[12:02] actually touches on something that I
[12:04] think relates to all categories of
[12:06] culture and art today. For example, Xu
[12:09] Haofeng made a film called "The Master,
[12:11] " which showed that the martial arts
[12:14] world in Tianjin back then was full of
[12:16] deep schemes and calculations. For
[12:18] instance, when I asked him—though his
[12:20] answer might not necessarily be right
[12:21] —I asked, "Some people talk about
[12:23] Bruce Lee, was Bruce Lee really the
[12:25] greatest?" How come he never
[12:26] participated in any competitions, right
[12:28] ? He never had an official record. If
[12:30] you're that great, you should have
[12:31] fought everyone to prove it. Later, he
[12:32] explained that this is also a rule of
[12:34] the Chinese martial arts world; you see
[12:36] , even masters like Ip Man back in the
[12:37] day...
[12:38] >> When Ip Man arrived in Hong Kong, he
[12:40] wouldn't go challenge martial arts
[12:42] schools himself, because if a master
[12:43] were defeated, they’d be finished.
[12:46] But Ip Man would train a student, and
[12:47] that student would challenge the Hong
[12:49] Kong schools, which would then allow Ip
[12:51] Man to open his own. You see, there’s
[12:53] a deep sense of social etiquette
[12:55] involved. Take a look, you can watch a
[12:57] clip of that Xu Haofeng one. You know,
[13:02] I need to ask you about this, you know
[13:04] a lot about the martial arts circles
[13:06] and different factions. I feel like
[13:08] Chinese things, or perhaps Eastern
[13:09] things, have this specific
[13:10] characteristic—or are they just being
[13:12] made out to be more mysterious than
[13:13] they are? Well, for example, I feel
[13:15] like some things today, with the
[13:17] development of technology...It makes me
[13:19] rethink certain things, like, for
[13:20] instance, those chess-playing robots.
[13:22] He made me realize in an instant that
[13:24] many of my past illusions about Go were
[13:26] shattered. It makes me laugh, because I
[13:28] used to think playing Go wasn't just
[13:30] about calculating the win.
[13:33] >> I thought it involved your aesthetics
[13:35] and your character to play truly great
[13:37] Go, but when you realize it's just a
[13:38] more precise form of calculation, it
[13:40] feels like a disillusionment; so I
[13:42] think, for example, of Chinese martial
[13:44] arts.
[13:46] >> Traditional medicine, opera, music—
[13:48] from the past until today, I still hold
[13:51] onto this image: doesn't one have to
[13:53] learn like Confucius did, traveling to
[13:55] teach? As Wendao just said, you can't
[13:57] learn the "true scriptures" in school;
[14:00] you have to follow a master, travel the
[14:02] world, and learn how to carry yourself
[14:04] along the way. You aren't just learning
[14:07] a craft; you are learning something
[14:09] comprehensive. It seems like that, but
[14:11] aren't there some things that must be
[14:13] done this way?
[14:15] >> That's definitely the case, meaning
[14:16] that we don't live in this society just
[14:18] by relying on science.
[14:20] >> We are not machines. Because Go is
[14:23] something machines can play—it's just
[14:25] black and white stones, just zeros and
[14:27] ones—that's why they can do it.
[14:31] >> If you ask a scientist to describe how
[14:33] beautiful a dream is, they're at a loss
[14:35] , right? They're stumped. Let's assume
[14:37] Cao Xueqin was a writer who was willing
[14:39] to take on an apprentice. If that
[14:41] apprentice had talent and wanted to
[14:43] grasp the way of writing, what would
[14:45] they actually learn from him? Technique
[14:48] is not the most important thing,
[14:49] because I believe many skills have
[14:51] innate factors; it’s normal to
[14:53] surpass your master in technique. For
[14:55] example, your physical fitness; if
[14:56] you're practicing martial arts with him
[14:58] , I might just be fitter than you,
[15:00] right? I might be faster at running,
[15:02] right? Some people, for instance, when
[15:03] learning appraisal, are just born with
[15:05] more sensitivity; they're even more
[15:07] sensitive than the master, and they can
[15:09] do it, right? But you cannot because
[15:10] you have......
[15:11] >> surpassed your master in some skill,
[15:13] and then start to despise him. This is
[15:15] a cultural issue. Chinese culture
[15:17] itself contains many elements of
[15:19] betrayal; why do Chinese people love
[15:21] property so much? Our culture itself is
[15:23] prone to betrayal. You know, the only
[15:27] thing in this society today that I
[15:29] believe can still avoid betrayal is
[15:31] family ethics, as you often say; for
[15:33] example, it's very hard to betray your
[15:35] father, right? Of course, there are
[15:37] exceptions even with fathers, but
[15:38] there's also the bond of a teacher
[15:40] being like a father, right? But in a
[15:42] family relationship, nobody does that.
[15:44] For instance, if you have a conflict
[15:46] with your own father, and you go out
[15:47] and argue about who is right and wrong,
[15:49] do you think that's meaningful? That
[15:51] would be meaningless. If you believe a
[15:54] master-disciple relationship is such an
[15:56] ethic, rather than a company, you
[15:57] acknowledge it the day you enter the
[15:59] door, and you must strictly follow this
[16:01] system; that is culture.
[16:04] >> I think the question you just raised
[16:05] and the one I answered might be on two
[16:07] different levels. You were asking about
[16:09] the level of transmission.
[16:10] >> No, you were asking whether those
[16:11] traditional things have something more
[16:13] "divine" or profound.
[16:14] >> Hmm.
[16:15] >> Yes.
[16:15] >> Right, you were asking...
[16:16] >> Yes, is it really necessary to have
[16:18] such a system, the Confucian way, to be
[16:20] able to teach? You mentioned Go, then
[16:23] Go has nothing "divine" in it.
[16:24] >> But a Go master has something "divine"
[16:27] in them.
[16:27] >> I think a Go master still has something
[16:29] more "divine" than that robot.
[16:30] >> Where is the "divinity"?
[16:32] >> Where is it? It's that a person
[16:34] following a robot's manual to play Go
[16:36] cannot find peace within themselves,
[16:37] but a master can help them find it.
[16:39] This sense of settling down, this
[16:41] ability to put one's heart at ease—
[16:42] for example, the Second Patriarch went
[16:44] to seek Bodhidharma because he wanted
[16:45] to settle his mind. This mind hasn't
[16:47] settled yet. Then you learn any skill,
[16:50] other than just the technique itself,
[16:52] it might...
[16:53] >> You are right.
[16:54] >> Yes, this is the master, who can even
[16:56] influence your mindset. For instance,
[16:58] back then, they remember Go Seigen. Go
[17:00] Seigen would interact with this student
[17:02] like this; the student was anxious
[17:03] because he kept losing for a while. Go
[17:05] Seigen just said, "You need to have a
[17:07] calm mind." I could say that too,
[17:09] that's what a master is. But then he
[17:11] explained, "What is a calm mind?" He
[17:13] spoke a profound truth that still
[17:15] influences me today. He said your calm
[17:17] mind is your original intention for
[17:19] playing Go. When you first loved
[17:21] playing Go, did you necessarily hope to
[17:23] win? You might have hoped someone would
[17:26] beat you. You need to return to that
[17:28] most innocent time of yours. He said,
[17:30] think about it—you have the chance to
[17:32] play against the world's greatest
[17:34] master.
[17:34] >> Hmm.
[17:35] >> This is something others can't even
[17:36] dream of getting; aren't you happy? You
[17:38] say you lost, you lost, but you had
[17:40] this experience; aren't you happy about
[17:41] that? See, sometimes a master just
[17:43] points out something for you at a
[17:44] critical moment. And there's another
[17:46] important point. From my perspective,
[17:49] all the relationships facing challenges
[17:51] today aren't just limited to the
[17:53] traditional master-apprentice bond of
[17:55] craftsmanship; even the teacher-student
[17:57] dynamic in schools has changed. But if
[18:00] you're talking about a craft, it has a
[18:02] unique feature. As Professor Lu said,
[18:05] all crafts and skills don't just put a
[18:07] student at ease; the craft itself gives
[18:09] you peace of mind. Mm.
[18:13] >> A true craft or skill is just like
[18:15] playing chess, weaving rattan, or
[18:17] working with wood. Once you immerse
[18:22] yourself in it, you feel that if I do
[18:24] this for my whole life, I'll be very
[18:26] happy.
[18:29] >> It gives you a foundation for life.
[18:30] >> That's right, like Mr. Ma's heart,
[18:32] which is made of huanghuali wood. The
[18:34] huanghuali settled your heart, and you
[18:36] found your purpose in life. That's how
[18:38] traditional craftsmanship always is.
[18:40] What kind of person is an artisan? We
[18:41] often talk about the spirit of the
[18:43] craftsman.
[18:43] >> Aren't teachers being asked to learn
[18:45] this "craftsman spirit" now? They say
[18:46] an artisan must do everything to the
[18:48] best of their ability. Yet, people
[18:49] rarely ask*why*they must do everything
[18:51] to the best of their ability.
[18:53] >> Mm.
[18:54] >> In reality, often when they are doing
[18:56] something, it's not just about wanting
[18:58] to do it perfectly; it's about being
[19:00] deeply focused in that very moment.
[19:01] Maybe yesterday I was upset with my son
[19:03] , or something else happened, but today
[19:05] , when I do this, once I start, I'm
[19:07] completely in it.
[19:08] >> This is liberation.
[19:09] >> Don't look at how much box office some
[19:11] movie claims to have—hundreds of
[19:13] millions—in terms of comedic
[19:15] structure, it's far inferior to the
[19:17] works of Zhang Xie Zhuang.
[19:18] >> Mm.
[19:21] >> Their comedies today are still just
[19:23] like candied hawthorn sticks—just a
[19:25] simple string of gags. But back then,
[19:27] they were already layering structures,
[19:29] building up like a multi-story building
[19:31] . You see the difference? It's a huge
[19:33] gap in terms of structural technique.
[19:36] It means our current dramatic level,
[19:38] especially in comedy, is miles behind
[19:41] what it was 1,000 years ago. That was
[19:44] what amazed me the most at the time.
[19:47] But isn't laughter the result? Today
[19:52] everyone is laughing out loud; even a
[19:54] phone can make people laugh. But I'm
[20:03] saying, well, even though laughter is
[20:05] laughter, there's a huge gap,
[20:07] especially in the context of drama.
[20:13] >> Ah.
[20:16] >> The difference is truly massive. So why
[20:21] are we still going in circles today,
[20:23] trapped in these most basic comedic
[20:25] methods and tropes? It's like a
[20:29] whirlpool. You take a comedy from 20
[20:33] years ago and compare it to one from
[20:35] today, and it's the same method, the
[20:37] same routine—why are we still stuck
[20:39] in this loop? Everyone is trying to
[20:43] find the "hook" in a headless way. Why?
[20:46] Because there has been no improvement.
[20:49] >> Hmm.
[20:50] >> They lack technical methods; everyone
[20:52] lacks them, and now everyone is just
[20:54] trying to find that hook within generic
[20:56] characters. Finding the hook and the
[20:59] method just leads to that one approach.
[21:01] >> But it’s not sustainable; the
[21:02] sustainability is poor.
[21:03] >> It’s becoming more and more similar.
[21:08] >> It’s getting increasingly repetitive,
[21:09] and this spinning in place happens when
[21:11] you don't know history, because this
[21:13] history has a gap; after that gap, they
[21:15] don't know how stories were told in
[21:17] their past civilization.
[21:21] >> How high a level they once reached.
[21:23] >> They don't know. If they knew, they
[21:26] would have studied the scripts well
[21:27] while in school. Teachers would have
[21:30] been there, someone would have taught
[21:32] them. They would know how I should tell
[21:34] a story. At the very least, we
[21:37] shouldn't be lagging behind the
[21:38] ancients of 1,000 years ago. Right? But
[21:41] that’s where the anxiety lies, you
[21:43] know? So today, if I say—
[21:47] >> If this can't be passed down, it means
[21:49] that future generations, the Chinese
[21:51] people—
[21:53] >> The Chinese people deserve to enjoy
[21:55] higher-quality comedy. Right. It’s a
[21:58] bit like cooking; what’s popular now
[22:00] is fast food. Fast food can fill you up
[22:01] , and everyone is used to it, but you
[22:03] should know there’s another culinary
[22:05] technique called traditional Chinese
[22:07] cuisine, which is very complex.
[22:09] >> Right.
[22:09] >> But once this skill is lost, you have
[22:10] to explore it all over again, though it
[22:12] is still possible to explore. Look,
[22:13] food these days is stir-fried much
[22:15] better than 30 years ago. Today, even a
[22:17] small restaurant can cook well; a lot
[22:18] of the time, that also comes from
[22:20] exploration. A large portion of our
[22:22] dishes now are called "new-style
[22:23] cuisine." Listening to Peisi talk about
[22:25] this, I understand it better. He takes
[22:27] something that wasn't originally
[22:29] technical and breaks it down into
[22:30] techniques, telling you the technical
[22:32] points, so it can become a textbook and
[22:34] be passed down.
[22:35] >> It’s transmittable.
[22:36] >> It’s somewhat systematic.
[22:38] >> For example, take stand-up comedy,
[22:39] which so many young people like now,
[22:41] >> And crosstalk,
[22:43] >> They focus on jokes about the current
[22:44] era, keeping up with the times, finding
[22:47] lots of funny material and gags from
[22:48] contemporary life.
[22:49] >> Someone goes out there, blabbers on,
[22:51] and isn't it very popular? It’s also
[22:53] very funny, but it’s not theater. A
[22:55] theatrical event must have actors in
[22:57] costume; you meet the audience through
[22:59] a character, and at the same time,
[23:01] there must be a plot.
[23:02] >> That’s what’s called theater.
[23:04] >> No, no, no. Regarding what you said
[23:07] about stand-up comedy in China now—I
[23:09] watch them often—I think the real
[23:11] pity is that they lack the resources to
[23:13] draw upon our own history, things from
[23:15] our own culture. Currently, their
[23:19] approach is to borrow directly from
[23:20] Western English stand-up. They study
[23:22] many methods, like why this makes
[23:24] people laugh versus that, or when to do
[23:26] what. But bringing it over from English
[23:29] , some things don't quite align with
[23:30] ours. If they could find your approach
[23:35] and tap into that treasure trove from
[23:36] our own roots, it would certainly be
[23:38] better. It’s like how in the West,
[23:42] when they study literature or film,
[23:43] they have to go back to Homer’s epics
[23:45] or Shakespeare first. That’s how they
[23:48] can innovate. Everyone understands the
[23:50] foundational structure, and as they
[23:52] slowly innovate, the content becomes
[23:54] inexhaustible—an endless supply. You,
[23:56] you need to...
[23:57] >> This isn't—there is an essential
[23:59] difference, perhaps I’m talking about
[24:00] the distinction between stand-up and
[24:02] theater.
[24:03] >> Theater, simply put, can be repeated
[24:05] forever. You can perform it 100, 200,
[24:08] or 1,000 times.
[24:09] >> But if they tell a joke a second time,
[24:11] people will ask, "Why are you saying
[24:12] this again?" That’s just how it is.
[24:14] >> So, what does this reflect? It reflects
[24:17] value. What has higher value becomes
[24:19] clear at a glance. Right? Theater has
[24:22] been valuable since ancient times. We
[24:24] can't say the same for stand-up. What
[24:26] is its value? The value of stand-up
[24:28] lies in its spontaneity. For instance,
[24:31] if I go up there, I can improvise—
[24:33] maybe comment on the nice weather.
[24:37] It’s about using the live setting to
[24:38] connect with the audience, but this
[24:40] can’t be repeated. Listening to you,
[24:44] I’m reminded of my own preference for
[24:46] comedy. Performers like stand-up
[24:49] comedians or crosstalk artists are
[24:51] unique talents in my eyes, worthy of
[24:53] great admiration. It’s a linguistic
[24:57] art that most people can’t reach.
[25:02] However, sometimes when I’m watching,
[25:03] I feel a bit embarrassed for them,
[25:05] because they are so intent on making
[25:07] you laugh.
[25:11] >> I start to worry for them, afraid that
[25:12] I won’t be amused. There’s just
[25:14] that kind of feeling. So, I often think
[25:18] —and this is just my personal
[25:20] preference—it’s a bit like a line
[25:22] from a Ma Sanli crosstalk CD, which
[25:24] says, "It’s not that I want to tell
[25:26] jokes."
[25:28] >> Yeah, the jokes force themselves upon
[25:30] you.
[25:30] >> What kind of forced humor is this? What
[25:33] I’ve discovered that I find even more
[25:35] interesting is what? Following nature
[25:38] —meaning none of us four have any
[25:39] comedic talent, we’re just ordinary
[25:41] people in daily life, but you see, when
[25:43] we’re in someone’s living room or
[25:45] eating together, we don’t know how it
[25:46] happens, but suddenly we’re all
[25:48] roaring with laughter. Hey, I find that
[25:51] kind of laughter really leaves a deep
[25:53] impression on me; it’s just that
[25:55] it’s not from genius. It just happens
[25:59] naturally between a few characters in
[26:01] life. I’m thinking again, of course,
[26:05] drama is also a meticulously structured
[26:07] production, but sometimes the laughter
[26:09] triggered by your drama is a bit
[26:11] similar to what I’m talking about,
[26:13] closer to nature. It’s like it starts
[26:17] building up right from the beginning,
[26:19] forming a sort of trend. This trend
[26:23] eventually brings you people together,
[26:25] and boom, it just makes you laugh. So
[26:28] for me, even though it’s manufactured
[26:30] , it seems to be closer to something
[26:32] natural. Am I—is this feeling of mine
[26:35] that of an amateur?
[26:37] >> No, no, let me tell you, what you’re
[26:39] describing is the third category. We
[26:41] just mentioned three categories: the
[26:43] first is classic drama, which needs no
[26:45] explanation—it must have a script,
[26:47] rehearsals, and repeated polishing to
[26:49] be performed. As for talk shows, the
[26:52] kind we’re talking about today is
[26:54] limited to the type I saw in this video
[26:56] . It has a script, it’s written by
[26:59] someone in advance, and some have
[27:00] teleprompters to prompt you; this is
[27:02] also a form of quasi-performance. What
[27:04] I’m talking about now is the third
[27:06] type you mentioned, which is the
[27:08] highest level—it’s just people
[27:09] talking at home, with no theme, and it
[27:11] happens spontaneously. I, of course,
[27:13] hope for the greatest talk show
[27:15] comedian today, which would be: you get
[27:17] on stage, I give you a topic, and you
[27:18] just start talking.
[27:19] >> There are, there are, there are those
[27:21] kinds too.
[27:22] >> That’s the impressive kind. To me,
[27:23] that’s the most impressive, the kind
[27:25] you can’t analyze.
[27:26] >> Yes, completely improvised. Everything
[27:29] inside you, everything in your heart is
[27:30] all you’ve got. So what’s our topic
[27:32] for today? For example, if we come up
[27:33] here today without any preparation, and
[27:35] we say the topic for today is what?
[27:36] It's marriage. Apart from this topic,
[27:38] you can’t talk about anything else.
[27:39] If this person can control the stage
[27:41] and speak for a long time, then
[27:42] that’s real talent. Wow, I've met
[27:43] people like that in my life. In a way,
[27:45] sometimes at a dinner table, someone is
[27:48] just improvising. That's what you call
[27:50] a master of wit who captivates everyone
[27:52] ; they have no script, but their state
[27:54] is
[27:55] >> the highest level. You're talking about
[27:57] this type, which is different from the
[27:59] performance type.
[28:00] >> Two different types.
[28:01] >> Right.
[28:03] >> Which one do you think you belong to?
[28:06] >> I am the technical type.
[28:07] >> Technical.
[28:08] >> Technical.
[28:09] >> Yes, the technical type.
[28:10] >> That's right.
[28:11] >> I rely on technique. Also, I read an
[28:14] article the other day. I think this
[28:17] article was a wake-up call, asking if
[28:19] the jokes we hear today are actually
[28:21] funny.
[28:23] >> I feel that, look, when I first heard
[28:25] Western stand-up, I noticed they had
[28:27] those laugh tracks—is it called a
[28:29] laugh track or canned laughter? Now,
[28:32] sometimes when I see you professionals,
[28:34] I'm used to breaking things down to
[28:35] examine them. So, I read this article,
[28:39] and the point was: if you did an
[28:41] experiment and removed all the sound
[28:43] effects.
[28:45] >> Take those soap operas I did a bit of
[28:46] back in the day, where there was
[28:48] someone leading the laughter off-screen
[28:49] .
[28:50] >> Mm-hmm.
[28:50] >> Oh, I think those laugh leaders are
[28:52] real talents, they're talents in
[28:54] Beijing. Even when it wasn't funny at
[28:56] all, when I said something that wasn't
[28:58] funny, the person leading the laughter,
[28:59] a woman, would stand up.
[29:01] >> Everyone else laughs at her.
[29:02] >> Everyone laughs, so it's good. Hey,
[29:05] many TV shows now are like this.
[29:07] >> They all rely on this.
[29:09] >> Right, so if we take it apart, mm.
[29:12] >> Remove all these sound effects.
[29:14] >> Mm-hmm.
[29:15] >> Strip it back to your most simple, the
[29:17] joke you told yourself,
[29:19] >> the punchline itself.
[29:21] >> Is it actually funny? It's not really
[29:24] that funny. We're saying, remove the
[29:29] laughter and the people leading it.
[29:34] There are just certain people laughing
[29:35] there. Actually, it's not that funny
[29:39] either. Laughter has a perimeter; it is
[29:44] also influenced by the surrounding
[29:45] environment.
[29:48] >> Mm-hmm.
[29:52] >> So, even if it's just a little bit warm
[29:54] , everyone will be infected by it.
[29:58] Right, this environment causes
[30:00] conformity; people seem to be
[30:01] suggestible, they are suggestible.
[30:03] >> Laughter is contagious.
[30:05] >> It's like it's ordering me to laugh.
[30:06] >> Exactly.
[30:07] >> And you feel if many people are
[30:08] laughing and you're not, it's a very
[30:10] embarrassing thing, so you know you
[30:11] have to laugh along, yes, you have to
[30:13] laugh along.
[30:13] >> Aloof. The first time I went to see a
[30:16] stand-up comedy show, I thought to
[30:18] myself, "Oh, this isn't hard. People
[30:20] bought tickets just waiting to be
[30:21] amused. Whatever you say, they're
[30:23] already prepared to laugh." I wondered,
[30:25] is it really that easy? Later, a
[30:27] stand-up comedian told me something
[30:29] that I still haven't fully grasped to
[30:31] this day. He said that something funny
[30:35] isn't just an actor saying a funny line
[30:37] ; it's a funny actor saying it. That's
[30:40] it.
[30:41] >> It's the branding effect.
[30:42] >> For example, if we both go up and say
[30:44] the exact same thing, he will
[30:46] definitely be funnier than me because
[30:48] his brand is that of a comedy star, so
[30:50] people are already prepared for it.
[30:52] >> Yes, that is a funny actor, exactly.
[30:54] >> The logic behind it changes.
[30:56] >> Since we both come from a television
[30:58] background, we are quite used to
[30:59] dealing with live audiences. I'd like
[31:01] to know, do you like that?
[31:02] >> I don't like it. Does it help you?
[31:05] >> It doesn't help. For me personally, it
[31:08] actually has the opposite effect. It
[31:11] makes you feel nervous.
[31:12] >> Very nervous, especially when we cheer
[31:14] for you.
[31:15] >> Yes, very nervous. Cheering at
[31:17] inappropriate moments is really
[31:18] nerve-wracking; it can be quite
[31:20] terrifying.
[31:21] >> Terrifying.
[31:22] >> Mm.
[31:22] >> Right.
[31:23] >> You still need it to be natural and
[31:24] from the heart.
[31:26] >> Yes, because, why? It might be that I'm
[31:29] afraid that this is—this is it.
[31:32] >> So you see, Teacher Chen seems to be
[31:34] establishing a system now, implying
[31:36] that comedy has a methodology. For
[31:38] example, I saw*The Balcony*, which you
[31:40] originally performed.
[31:42] >> Yes.
[31:42] >> Later, I watched the version performed
[31:44] by your son, Chen Dayu, and I realized,
[31:47] "Wow, his method seems rather
[31:48] miraculous." It's like, if you apply
[31:50] the method correctly...He is not that
[31:52] kind of actor. His kind of displacement
[31:54] , his exaggeration—the audience just
[31:56] laughs.
[31:56] >> Right.
[31:57] >> They just laugh. So I feel his sense of
[32:01] anxiety is reflected in how he trains
[32:03] people. Our documentary has a segment
[32:09] on this; let's see how he trains them.
[32:14] We can say that no matter how you
[32:15] practice, you just have to follow
[32:17] through with it. His natural conditions
[32:20] are quite good.
[32:22] >> Let's dissect the student. You have to
[32:25] pull this half open, take an electric
[32:26] saw and cut it right here. Then you can
[32:31] feel it; you can feel that this
[32:32] person's resonance chambers are all
[32:34] exceptionally good.
[32:37] >> Ah, well, that's up to him. The rest is
[32:39] really his own business.
[32:40] >> Got it.
[32:42] >> Hey, listen, but right now, your throat
[32:44] sound is a bit too heavy.
[32:46] >> The throat sound is too heavy. The part
[32:49] above hasn't been opened yet; once you
[32:51] open it, it’ll be incredible. Come,
[32:53] come, come, someone come over and look,
[32:55] come over, take a look, come have a
[32:58] visit. What is his current state? Once
[33:01] the head tilts up, we know it, just
[33:02] like when we play the trumpet. It's
[33:06] like a trumpet with half of it blocked.
[33:10] You need to pay attention to the "ah"
[33:12] mouth shape, don't bunch your tongue,
[33:14] keep it flat behind your teeth. Smile.
[33:18] Hey, good. "Ah" mouth shape, inhale,
[33:23] smile, hold it, yeah.
[33:26] >> Good.
[33:27] >> Just like that.
[33:29] >> Thank you, teacher.
[33:31] >> His very existence is passive from the
[33:33] start. When he creates comedic acts, he
[33:41] is consciously creating this passive
[33:42] situation and interpersonal
[33:44] relationship, so from the beginning, he
[33:46] will be interpreted by some as being
[33:48] lowly. Because he is showing off
[33:55] lowliness; he is constantly showing off
[33:57] lowliness. In other words, my entire
[34:03] creative process is about playing with
[34:05] this lowliness to constantly provide
[34:07] you with it, letting you develop a
[34:09] sense of superiority. Letting you adopt
[34:15] a condescending posture. That is why
[34:20] people often associate this with it
[34:21] being a lowly profession.
[34:28] >> That’s one thing, yawning.
[34:34] >> You're running this. I sell coffee.
[34:37] After class, I’ll sell coffee. If you
[34:40] keep talking about those vague,
[34:41] incomprehensible things that make
[34:43] everyone sleepier, my coffee business
[34:45] will be even better. Is that okay? Dad,
[34:48] oh boy.
[34:49] >> It all depends on you. Oh my.
[34:55] >> What you just said about this being a "
[34:57] lowly" profession, I sometimes wonder.
[35:01] Are you still looking at today through
[35:03] an old lens? Because, like in this era,
[35:06] there was a time, for example, with
[35:08] clowns, where their social status was
[35:10] indeed low, right? But it seems like
[35:13] today, being able to make people laugh
[35:15] is quite a big deal, isn't it?
[35:16] >> So high.
[35:17] >> Hey, look at this.
[35:18] >> Yes, I wish it were that high, that
[35:20] high. Look at those who succeed in
[35:22] comedy.
[35:23] >> Even if they are rich. Their status in
[35:25] this society is not high at all. Then
[35:29] doesn't your son's choice illustrate
[35:31] the trend? Then why would he insist on
[35:34] heading in this direction? Why does he
[35:37] insist on diving into this? Is it
[35:39] perhaps because I think this way? It's
[35:42] a few aspects. One is feeling that he
[35:45] might be more likely to succeed.
[35:48] >> Likely to succeed. Second, he feels
[35:52] that at least I can help him a bit, the
[35:54] family can help him a bit, help him
[35:56] with a foundation. Right, and another
[35:59] thing is that he still feels a sense of
[36:01] responsibility for carrying on the
[36:03] legacy. I heard that you are quite
[36:06] strict in your training of Chen Dayu,
[36:08] just like with everyone else.
[36:12] >> The same. I didn't give him any special
[36:14] treatment. At first, I didn't think he
[36:18] would make it, so I didn't put much
[36:19] effort into him.
[36:22] >> In his class and the second class, I
[36:24] always put him in a secondary position.
[36:27] Sort of a gradual cold shoulder.
[36:30] >> Why not a warm reception? He’s my own
[36:33] son, but that doesn't mean he's
[36:35] incapable. It's just that, compared to
[36:39] others—even those who didn't grow up
[36:41] doing this, or studied something else,
[36:43] or graduated from college in unrelated
[36:45] fields—
[36:47] >> they learned much faster than he did.
[36:50] >> Hmm.
[36:50] >> Yes, their performance from the very
[36:52] start was stronger than his.
[36:54] >> So, do you two have any conflicts when
[36:55] discussing things now? Different eras
[36:57] lead to different perspectives.
[36:58] >> No, no, no.
[37:01] >> Basically, our paths are quite similar;
[37:03] we both focus heavily on technique.
[37:09] Also, I feel that your sons actually
[37:11] harbor a secret admiration for you both
[37:13] ; some even feel very proud of their
[37:15] fathers. But let me tell you, every
[37:19] person's parents are different. I've
[37:22] only just realized—Yijun, have you
[37:24] noticed? For example, sometimes on a
[37:27] show, I'll say, "Oh, my parents are
[37:29] getting older, and I really cherish
[37:32] them." I see some comments, especially
[37:36] from many young people, saying, "Wentao
[37:38] has a good relationship with his
[37:40] parents; he's lucky to live in a family
[37:42] with such good parents." I realized
[37:46] that might not be the majority today.
[37:51] >> It seems there is a minority of young
[37:52] people who are, how should I put it,
[37:54] quite resentful toward their parents.
[37:59] For instance, they say, "You have that
[38:01] kind of father, so you have feelings
[38:03] for him. My parents treat me like a
[38:07] punching bag, a tool, a projection of
[38:10] their own lives, trying to mold me into
[38:12] who they are." Or they blame all their
[38:17] own life failures on me; there might be
[38:19] a lot of that.
[38:22] >> Hmm, not a few.
[38:25] >> I don't have much direct contact with
[38:27] such people, but I see a lot of such
[38:29] news.
[38:31] >> Mm-hmm.
[38:32] >> Our society is changing too fast, and
[38:34] with different generations holding
[38:36] different values, the conflicts become
[38:38] very intense. When we were young, there
[38:42] was a particularly obvious pattern.
[38:45] There are three major educational
[38:47] systems: the family is the first,
[38:49] schools are the second, and society is
[38:51] the third; these three systems used to
[38:53] be aligned. Today, it is different.
[38:55] Today, they point in different
[38:57] directions, so conflict is inevitable.
[38:59] When we were young, the education we
[39:01] received—what our parents said, what
[39:03] the school said, and what society said
[39:05] —was all the same.
[39:06] >> Now, parents say one thing. At school,
[39:09] it's another path, and when you enter
[39:11] society, it becomes yet another;
[39:13] everyone, regardless of what they've
[39:15] learned, will choose what is most
[39:16] advantageous for their survival once
[39:18] they can live independently. That is
[39:21] where the conflict in values arises.
[39:22] >> Moreover, many of these young people
[39:24] have backgrounds, ideals, and so on
[39:26] that are completely different from
[39:27] their parents 'living environments.
[39:29] >> Different, yes, in every aspect.
[39:30] >> This is also an issue; if they live in
[39:32] the city, their parents in the
[39:33] countryside might not be used to it at
[39:34] all—first of all, they can't stand
[39:35] the way you waste things. There is also
[39:37] a possibility that it is a
[39:38] developmental stage; we certainly
[39:39] rebelled against our parents a lot when
[39:40] we were young. I remember something
[39:42] hilarious, just like what you mentioned
[39:44] ; when I was a child, I wrote a letter
[39:45] to the "King of Fairy Tales," Zheng
[39:47] Enjie, complaining that my mom hit me
[39:48] —doing things like that, complaining
[39:50] about your parents, is a very common
[39:51] occurrence. But as you gradually grow
[39:53] up, that stage changes; people have
[39:55] various forms of rebellion. For example
[39:57] , my rebellion as a child was coming to
[39:59] Beijing for school—I only chose
[40:01] universities in Beijing; I didn't want
[40:03] to stay in Shanghai anymore. That urge
[40:05] to get far away definitely exists, but
[40:07] at a certain point, you return.
[40:10] Speaking of father-son relationships, I
[40:12] have a friend who, when his wife was
[40:14] about to give birth, was extremely
[40:15] fearful.
[40:16] >> He kept saying, "Oh, I hope it's not a
[40:18] son," because he felt the conflict
[40:20] between father and son would be immense
[40:22] .
[40:22] >> Right.
[40:22] >> He felt that father-daughter,
[40:23] mother-daughter, or mother-son
[40:25] relationships didn't have as much
[40:26] conflict, so just thinking about having
[40:28] a son made him very nervous.
[40:29] Fortunately, he later had a daughter,
[40:30] but it goes to show that he anticipated
[40:32] the conflict between these two
[40:34] generations. Another point is the "
[40:38] amount"—talking about discipline,
[40:40] rebellious phases, and so on—how much
[40:42] love do you really have for your child?
[40:48] >> Hmm.
[40:49] >> The amount; we rarely give them love.
[40:53] We turn all that love into resentment
[40:54] —hating that they can't do this,
[40:56] hating that they can't do that, hating
[40:58] that they lack this or that, and
[41:00] insisting on molding them into
[41:01] something specific. Teachers say you
[41:07] have to get a head start in life, and
[41:09] people believe this nonsense, then do
[41:11] crazy things, abusing these children,
[41:13] not letting them rest, and depriving
[41:15] them of the right to play. If the
[41:21] workload is too heavy, it turns into
[41:23] hatred. So, I really feel my choice was
[41:29] right. Since my child was small, I told
[41:35] him not to get 100 on his tests once he
[41:37] started school. If you come home with
[41:43] 100, I'll spank you.
[41:45] >> How should I put it? It's just so he
[41:46] doesn't push himself too hard.
[41:48] >> Right, play comes first. For children
[41:50] in elementary school, it's just about
[41:52] playing. 60 points is enough, just
[41:54] don't get a 59.
[41:56] >> Exactly, so on weekends, I would take
[41:58] my child out to play.
[42:00] >> There weren't many places to play back
[42:01] then, so we went into the mountains.
[42:03] >> Mhm.
[42:03] >> Oh, in the mountains, by the springs,
[42:06] oh my.
[42:06] >> In the trees, whatever, just playing.
[42:09] >> You said that so well.
[42:10] >> It was happy. I feel truly fortunate
[42:13] about the choice I made back then. It
[42:15] was the right one. First of all, our
[42:17] bond as father and son is deep. Yes,
[42:20] exactly. We rarely had those kinds of
[42:22] conflicts, very rarely.
[42:24] >> But if parents did that nowadays,
[42:26] others would say you're an
[42:27] irresponsible parent.
[42:29] >> We were like that back then, too. They
[42:33] would constantly call parents to come
[42:35] to the school. You've been called in,
[42:39] too.
[42:40] >> I didn't go. I adamantly refused to go.
[42:43] That's risky; I'd have to go.
[42:46] >> Hmm, that's tough. Teachers are also
[42:48] wronged, because they have enrollment
[42:50] rates to meet.
[42:50] >> That's right.
[42:52] >> Good teachers, especially when it comes
[42:54] to middle school, high school, and
[42:56] college entrance exams, are judged by
[42:58] how many students get into top schools.
[43:01] That is just brutal. It is absolutely
[43:03] brutal.
[43:03] >> But, isn't it said that competition for
[43:05] children is getting more intense? What
[43:07] if you don't hold them to high
[43:08] standards?
[43:10] >> No. No.
[43:11] >> Impossible. What do you mean?
[43:15] >> Wherever they go, there will be
[43:16] competition; that's a certainty. It's
[43:20] not that if they learn a little less
[43:22] now, they won't be able to catch up.
[43:24] That's impossible. Because their brains
[43:27] haven't developed to that level yet,
[43:29] forcing them into advanced math is...It
[43:31] makes no sense. That's really torturing
[43:33] the child, suppressing their natural
[43:35] instincts.
[43:36] >> Right, so the government is now trying
[43:38] to curb these after-school tutoring
[43:40] programs, which is absolutely the right
[43:42] thing to do. It’s to prevent this
[43:43] pressure and inequality right from the
[43:45] starting line.
[43:46] >> Yes, you can't just sit by and do
[43:48] nothing.
[43:49] >> But you also have a requirement that at
[43:51] 18, they must be self-reliant and can
[43:52] no longer depend on you.
[43:54] >> At 18, they must be self-reliant.
[43:56] >> So, is getting 60 points on the exam
[43:58] okay?
[43:58] >> It is. Your son, Dayu, is capable.
[44:01] >> No, I mean,
[44:02] >> he has good brain development. His
[44:05] character is very sound. He can support
[44:08] himself in whatever he does.
[44:10] >> Yeah. I agree, because nowadays, if you
[44:15] want to be self-reliant, even if
[44:17] you’re on your own without parents or
[44:19] connections, earning enough to support
[44:21] yourself isn’t that hard.
[44:24] >> Of course, you can't expect to earn
[44:26] enough to stay in five-star hotels
[44:27] immediately; that won't work, but just
[44:29] supporting yourself,
[44:30] >> just supporting yourself.
[44:31] >> I think any able-bodied person can
[44:33] support themselves without an issue;
[44:34] today’s society provides plenty of
[44:36] job opportunities.
[44:37] >> No problem. So, for example, your son,
[44:41] >> does he rely on you at all?
[44:43] >> He does, but throughout his schooling
[44:45] and his career, I have never once
[44:47] helped him. When he came back from
[44:49] studying abroad and was looking for a
[44:51] job, he asked, "Dad, can you help me
[44:53] find a job?" I said, "Sure, I can
[44:54] introduce you to one, but I'm only
[44:56] responsible for the introduction; the
[44:58] rest is up to you." After that, I never
[45:00] interfered. The parents who are the
[45:02] most anxious in society right now are
[45:04] actually the middle class. Why is that?
[45:07] They are most afraid that their
[45:08] children will have a worse life than
[45:10] them. If you’re at the very bottom or
[45:12] the very top, you aren’t that anxious
[45:14] ; you just accept how things are.
[45:17] It’s when you’re in the middle that
[45:18] you feel anxious, hoping your kids will
[45:20] do better than you, which leads to a
[45:22] lot of competition. Why must they live
[45:25] better than me? If they turn out the
[45:27] same as me, that’s fine. And besides,
[45:29] I’m talking about the wealthy class
[45:31] —why does each generation have to
[45:33] outdo the last? If each generation must
[45:35] be better than the one before, you’re
[45:37] just pushing yourselves into a dead end
[45:39] , aren't you? Once you reach the peak,
[45:41] you’re just waiting for the fall.
[45:42] Actually, you can see this is the
[45:44] situation in developed societies now.
[45:46] Competition in developed societies is
[45:47] not as fierce as ours anymore; that
[45:49] intense phase has already passed.
[45:51] Everyone, especially—let's not even
[45:53] talk about the West, just look at Asia
[45:55] —in societies like Japan, everyone
[45:57] just works their job, earns their
[45:58] salary, and doesn't have many more
[46:00] demands.
[46:01] >> You can maintain a balanced mindset.
[46:02] >> Right.
[46:03] >> Yes, you must maintain a balanced
[46:05] mindset.
[46:05] >> Exactly.
[46:06] >> If your mindset isn't balanced, you
[46:08] can’t do anything well. Say, why do I
[46:11] feel that nowadays, some parents have
[46:13] such intense and unusual expectations
[46:15] for their children? It's so intense
[46:20] that, as you said, you start to wonder
[46:22] if it has gone beyond the bounds of
[46:24] love.
[46:26] >> Beyond
[46:27] >> The limits
[46:31] >> It’s understandable to want them to
[46:33] marry young, have children early, get
[46:35] into a good school, or land a stable
[46:36] job, but sometimes it just gets to the
[46:38] point of...
[46:42] >> Right
[46:43] >> Cutting off ties—threatening to cut
[46:45] off the relationship if they don't
[46:46] comply. They have no understanding of
[46:50] the life process; they just think that
[46:51] getting high scores can change
[46:53] everything, but that's not how it works
[46:55] . Honestly, I think having a sound body
[46:59] and mind—the emotional and
[47:00] intellectual intelligence we talk about
[47:02] —requires being nurtured in a healthy
[47:04] , balanced environment.
[47:06] >> That’s how it’s developed. It isn't
[47:08] just about how many points you score on
[47:10] a single exam,
[47:10] >> which is enough to cope with survival
[47:12] in the future. Another point is that
[47:14] your ultimate goal, the goal of
[47:15] education, is to step into society and
[47:17] fulfill your corresponding social
[47:19] responsibilities. In terms of social
[47:21] responsibility, we all tend to think
[47:23] that a "decent" job with high pay is
[47:25] what matters, but that doesn't
[47:26] necessarily bring happiness. When
[47:29] society creates these hierarchies and
[47:31] classifies people into different tiers,
[47:33] the pressure becomes immense, as people
[47:35] feel their job is inferior to another's
[47:37] . On the other hand, precisely because
[47:40] society is changing so rapidly, some
[47:42] people see the possibility of change
[47:44] and are therefore actively striving for
[47:46] it. For instance, I visited a middle
[47:50] school in the mountains of Yunnan, the
[47:52] kind involved in that "screen changes
[47:54] destiny" program. What was it like? I
[47:58] used to think, "Oh, you kids at that
[47:59] school doing all these practice
[48:01] problems, it's just too miserable."
[48:03] They spend such long hours in class
[48:05] every day. During the breaks, there are
[48:07] no real breaks. Even when you talk to
[48:09] them, they’re still holding a
[48:11] practice book. If they aren't holding
[48:13] one, they don't know what to do; they
[48:15] just study all day. But when I chatted
[48:16] with their teachers, they said, "That's
[48:18] just the way it is. The only way for me
[48:20] to change my destiny is by getting a
[48:22] high score on the exam. There is no
[48:24] other way." Those kids really do get
[48:25] into good schools, but there’s no
[48:27] midday rest, no breaks, and no weekends
[48:29] . But he said, "Once we leave Peking
[48:31] University or Tsinghua, if someone
[48:32] leaps out from there, their destiny
[48:34] changes." And they, of course, once
[48:36] they’ve changed—once they’ve
[48:38] reached those top universities—they
[48:40] might look around and realize that they
[48:42] actually lost a lot during the process,
[48:43] just as you said, many things related
[48:45] to the soul and the spirit. But for
[48:48] them, the change is what matters.
[48:50] Because our society provides
[48:51] possibilities, they feel, why wouldn't
[48:53] they do it?
[48:55] >> Getting ahead is such a
[48:57] >> powerful desire, isn't it? Our culture
[49:00] >> No, but it's understandable. Who
[49:03] wouldn't want to get ahead? Some kids
[49:06] feel a sense of frustration themselves;
[49:08] there's competition among children and
[49:10] young people.
[49:11] >> Right.
[49:13] >> For example, if you give a task to a
[49:15] young person and others are doing well
[49:17] while they remain obscure, how could
[49:19] they possibly reconcile that in their
[49:21] hearts? Can they really find balance?
[49:24] >> Why wouldn't I be able to balance it?
[49:26] >> What balance? Everyone has their own
[49:28] struggles. The great have great
[49:30] struggles, as Wang Xifeng said, right?
[49:32] High status in society comes with its
[49:34] own difficulties. Even the Yongzheng
[49:36] Emperor, the ruler of a nation,
[49:37] lamented his own burdens. You don't
[49:39] know how hard it is; even as an emperor
[49:40] , you still face these things, right?
[49:42] It’s the same—the pressure to
[49:43] succeed, wanting your children to be
[49:44] successful, hating that they don't
[49:46] reach their potential—it’s all
[49:47] problematic.
[49:47] >> I am a conservative. Right. For
[49:50] instance, did you have a low
[49:52] self-evaluation when you were young?
[49:55] >> Quite low.
[49:57] >> So, you tended to take things too
[49:59] seriously, like a performance or
[50:01] something else.
[50:03] >> Ah, yes.
[50:04] >> Always afraid of failing.
[50:05] >> Yes.
[50:06] >> You have that mindset too?
[50:08] >> I do, how could I not?
[50:12] >> Doesn't that become a source of pain in
[50:14] life? Yes, it does. But the good thing
[50:19] is that the pressure comes from within.
[50:21] Because I don't have other pressures, I
[50:23] just put pressure on myself.
[50:26] >> Hmm.
[50:27] >> That’s my one good trait. Right, so
[50:30] pressure can be self-imposed.
[50:33] >> Yes, I won't let others put pressure on
[50:35] me.
[50:35] >> If others pressure me, I just won't do
[50:37] the work.
[50:38] >> Exactly, wherever there is oppression,
[50:41] there is resistance.
[50:43] >> I can just choose not to do it.
[50:44] >> Right.
[50:45] >> If the pressure gets too high, I just
[50:46] quit. I was just watching you earlier;
[50:48] is it true that "big fish" are more
[50:50] relaxed in their spirit?
[50:52] >> He is much more relaxed than I am. This
[50:54] younger generation, they are the ones
[50:56] who will produce great works in the
[50:58] future.
[50:59] >> Wait, why? Without pressure?
[51:02] >> I think pressure is what leads to great
[51:03] works.
[51:04] >> No, you only produce true work without
[51:06] pressure; pressure only forces out
[51:08] warped things.
[51:10] >> Mm.
[51:10] >> That’s really true.
[51:11] >> Mm. And then, you have to spend just as
[51:15] much effort fixing those distortions.
[51:17] >> Hey, don't people always say that
[51:19] suffering brings out the best in people
[51:20] ?
[51:21] >> Poets, but a poet's work doesn't always
[51:23] apply.
[51:23] >> A lot of it.
[51:24] >> People can't manufacture a market; it's
[51:26] just a pursuit of the spiritual world.
[51:28] Right.
[51:30] >> We are talking about today's society,
[51:31] where judgment is based on market value
[51:33] . Your worth, or what you call "traffic
[51:36] ," is just money. Putting money first
[51:39] and constantly measuring all success by
[51:41] wealth is definitely wrong.
[51:43] >> Because success has
[51:45] >> many signs. As I was saying, I remember
[51:51] my son telling me back when he was in
[51:52] middle school in the UK, that his math
[51:54] teacher was a math graduate from Oxford
[51:56] .
[52:00] >> He graduated from Oxford and spent his
[52:02] whole life as a middle school teacher.
[52:04] His last class was with us. He said he
[52:07] had been teaching math at that school
[52:09] since he graduated college, and he
[52:10] could write all those formulas on the
[52:12] blackboard from memory. We would think
[52:15] that if someone from such a top program
[52:17] ended up as a middle school teacher, it
[52:19] must mean they were a failure, right?
[52:21] In old Beijing dialect, we'd say they
[52:23] were "down and out." But that wasn't
[52:25] what they thought. They believed they
[52:27] just loved the work. He spent his whole
[52:29] life in one school, teaching until his
[52:31] very last class. All the students were
[52:33] deeply moved and remembered that final
[52:35] lesson. His life was a success.
[52:37] >> Mm.
[52:38] >> There was nothing unsuccessful about it
[52:39] ; in fact, it was quite successful.
[52:41] >> They say the success of a society is
[52:42] not defined by its elites, but by the
[52:44] success of its ordinary people.
[52:45] >> True.
[52:45] >> That’s much more profound, right? Yes
[52:47] , very profound. Look at how few elites
[52:49] there are. Everything in society is a
[52:51] pyramid. If you keep holding up those
[52:53] few at the very top as the standard for
[52:55] everyone else, how is society supposed
[52:56] to function?
[52:57] >> Always trying to climb to the top of
[52:59] the pyramid. That makes society
[53:02] unstable.
[53:03] >> Wow, that’s also profound.
[53:05] >> It is. But some might say, "It's easy
[53:07] for you to say that when you're already
[53:08] at the top."
[53:10] >> I don't want to be at the top.
[53:11] >> You are considered to be at the top in
[53:13] this field.
[53:13] >> I’m not, not even in that. There are
[53:16] people ahead of you in comedy. Let
[53:18] comedy be comedy. I’m not in terms of
[53:20] making money. By today's standards,
[53:23] I’m not.
[53:24] >> When he has a chance to make money, he
[53:25] is unwilling to compromise.
[53:27] >> You know that once you compromise, the
[53:29] money comes, right? Don't you
[53:31] compromise at times like that?
[53:33] >> People with a pure pursuit of art are
[53:35] unwilling to compromise; life is mainly
[53:37] about choosing from many options.
[53:39] >> Are you still relying on box office
[53:41] receipts to make a living now?
[53:43] >> Box office, box office, we have no
[53:45] financial backers. You could have
[53:46] sponsors, though.
[53:47] >> Financial backers? No, no, our
[53:49] financial backer is the box office.
[53:51] Just the audience.
[53:52] >> The audience, one audience member at a
[53:54] time.
[53:55] >> But my friends last time bought scalped
[53:57] tickets for 1,000 or 2,000 for good
[53:59] seats.
[54:01] >> Oh my.
[54:01] >> So did you make a fortune?
[54:03] >> I didn't make it; the scalpers made it.
[54:06] >> Their ticket prices are set by the
[54:07] Price Bureau, not by themselves.
[54:09] >> You can't just set them as high as you
[54:10] want.
[54:11] >> That wouldn't work, that wouldn't work.
[54:12] Then how come pop stars' concerts can
[54:14] reach thousands or tens of thousands?
[54:15] >> That also goes through approval.
[54:17] Someone has to approve it.
[54:19] >> Then why are they more expensive than
[54:20] you? Because they are more expensive
[54:23] than me, so yes. Their market rate is
[54:26] higher than mine, so my personal cost
[54:28] is lower. Therefore, my ticket prices
[54:32] are lower as well. Hey, you're talking
[54:34] about pricing strategy. Hmm.
[54:37] >> What is the basis for that? Is it...
[54:41] >> Based on the audience or based on the
[54:43] effort put in behind the scenes?
[54:47] >> There isn't one, actually, based on
[54:49] effort and hard work.
[54:50] >> You can't argue it that way.
[54:52] >> Right, the market is the market. That's
[54:55] one thing; for another, stage drama is
[54:57] inherently a rather outdated theatrical
[54:59] form. If you set such a high price for
[55:03] yourself, you're shutting out too many
[55:04] audience members. Therefore, I have no
[55:09] right to demand such high prices from
[55:11] the audience.
[55:13] >> But watching a play is already quite
[55:15] bourgeois, because the cost of watching
[55:17] a play is much higher than watching a
[55:18] movie. Tickets are definitely more
[55:20] expensive than movie tickets.
[55:22] >> And those who pursue watching plays are
[55:23] a specific group in the city; every
[55:25] city has them. We are actually very
[55:27] short on these kinds of theaters. Many
[55:28] people want to watch, and often I can't
[55:30] even get tickets myself. Even if you
[55:32] try, it's useless. I tell him, I go
[55:33] look for him, but he can't get a ticket
[55:35] . No.
[55:35] >> He can't buy a ticket. The official
[55:37] ticket selling process...right.
[55:39] >> If he sells tickets on his own, the
[55:40] authorities will come looking for
[55:41] trouble.
[55:41] >> Hey, how come it feels like Crosstalk
[55:43] has such great box office performance
[55:44] today? Of course, Guo Degang
[55:46] contributes a lot, right?
[55:47] >> You feel like Crosstalk is even more
[55:48] popular than stage drama audiences,
[55:50] right?
[55:50] >> Well, of course, of course.
[55:52] >> Right.
[55:52] >> That's all just for laughs.
[55:53] >> Yes.
[55:54] >> They are all theaters. Right.
[55:56] >> Why is there this difference?
[56:00] >> They are closer to the public and more
[56:01] popular; it's a simple matter. It
[56:05] follows the laws of the market.
[56:07] >> Your plays are also very popular.
[56:10] >> My plays, but I am an exceptional case
[56:12] in theater. I am not a common
[56:16] phenomenon. Not all plays can sell
[56:19] tickets. Most plays don't sell tickets.
[56:24] Or they sell tickets just symbolically.
[56:27] >> Hmm.
[56:27] >> Most have to rely on giveaways.
[56:29] >> Hmm.
[56:30] >> You have to give them away; it's a huge
[56:31] deal if you can even give them away,
[56:33] it’s that pathetic.
[56:34] >> No, it's that even if you give them
[56:35] away, people have to actually come.
[56:37] >> Have to come.
[56:37] >> Just being able to run a theater is no
[56:39] easy feat.
[56:39] >> Yes, it's not easy. Is there still a
[56:41] threshold issue? For example, if people
[56:44] go to see crosstalk, they expect to
[56:46] laugh from start to finish, with no
[56:47] threshold or pressure. They treat it as
[56:50] an activity, like meeting up for a meal
[56:52] and then going to see some
[56:53] entertainment.
[56:55] >> Yes.
[56:56] >> This concept, in film, was first turned
[56:58] into an "event" by Spielberg. He made
[57:01] watching his movies a scheduled social
[57:03] activity for everyone, not just
[57:05] watching a film.
[57:06] >> A kind of lifestyle. Yes, a lifestyle.
[57:08] People treat it as something to do, so
[57:10] they look for something relaxed and
[57:12] predictable—I'm just here to laugh,
[57:14] nothing else. But stage plays can be
[57:16] more demanding.
[57:18] >> Yes, and right now, a lot of what's out
[57:20] there isn't really that popular with
[57:22] the general public. Many people don't
[57:25] make theater for the audience; they
[57:27] >> pursue their own art.
[57:30] >> Exactly, so that stuff is not made for
[57:32] the market. I remember in an interview
[57:39] a few years ago, you mentioned your
[57:41] comedy theater, the "Da Dao," was quite
[57:43] lonely. You felt a bit solitary, like
[57:49] you had no rivals.
[57:52] >> That wasn't about the market; that was
[57:54] about my craft.
[57:56] >> Ah, no one to exchange ideas with. What
[58:01] about companies like Mahua FunAge that
[58:03] perform comedies? Aren't they your
[58:06] rivals? We are competitors in the
[58:09] market. But they don't constitute a
[58:11] true rival. Why is that? The market is
[58:14] too big. Our two companies are
[58:16] practically negligible and can be
[58:18] ignored. Even the government's industry
[58:21] and commerce departments can ignore us;
[58:23] what's the point of counting two fools?
[58:26] You know, Mr. Pei, this, this, this,
[58:29] human nature, no, no, human nature,
[58:32] this, this, personality, right? He made
[58:35] a choice that, in my view, is one I
[58:37] would absolutely never make. At one
[58:42] point, the money he earned performing
[58:44] solo was much more than what his entire
[58:46] theater troupe earned.
[58:49] >> Much more.
[58:50] >> Right. Why is that? It’s not
[58:52] challenging. You finish a work, people
[58:55] like it, and you make money. It’s
[58:58] just an assembly line.
[58:59] >> Exactly. What else can you do? Then you
[59:01] just keep repeating and repeating,
[59:03] becoming a money-printing machine.
[59:04] Where’s the fun in that?
[59:06] >> Don't you love money?
[59:08] >> I do.
[59:10] >> But didn't I hear from the old-timers
[59:11] that you're extremely stingy? They’re
[59:15] just joking around.
[59:17] >> What’s the main reason? I don’t
[59:19] really have the habit of spending money
[59:21] . More importantly, I love doing this.
[59:24] I love what I’m working on right now.
[59:26] >> Passion is very important.
[59:28] >> Yes, passion is crucial, so money is
[59:31] honestly second—it comes second.
[59:34] >> So, he ultimately chose this path, even
[59:36] if it meant doing theater. When he
[59:39] tells these young people, "You can make
[59:41] a living off of what I’ve taught you
[59:42] through box office sales,"
[59:46] >> You certainly can't compare that to the
[59:48] earnings of those popular stars and
[59:49] idols. But you are self-reliant, and
[59:52] you’re relying on this craft.
[59:54] >> Right. It seems there’s a difference
[59:57] in the types of satisfaction. I
[60:02] actually feel even more of a sense of
[60:03] achievement from this than from my own
[60:05] success.
[60:08] >> Yes.
[60:10] >> Right, not long ago, two of our
[60:12] students in Shanghai directed a
[60:14] structural comedy, a British structural
[60:16] comedy. Yes. I mean, if you’re going
[60:21] to direct structural comedy, you have
[60:22] to come through my door. There's
[60:25] nowhere else to go.
[60:27] >> Hmm.
[60:29] >> People who possess such unique skills
[60:31] in structural comedy are an important
[60:33] human asset.
[60:34] >> Exactly.
[60:35] >> In the old days, when nations went to
[60:37] war, the people they would plunder were
[60:38] these craftsmen.
[60:39] >> Exactly these people.
[60:40] >> This is an incredibly precious
[60:42] achievement of civilization. For
[60:44] example, if you look at the various
[60:46] trades of the past, even if someone was
[60:48] just a bamboo weaver or a teapot maker,
[60:50] they weren't trying to get rich quick.
[60:54] They were just carrying out their
[60:55] father's expectations—doing this one
[60:57] thing to the best of their ability. If
[61:00] you pass that down, you’ll never go
[61:02] hungry; you can sustain your children
[61:04] and grandchildren. It could have lasted
[61:06] until today. But why did some things
[61:08] break off later on? It wasn't passed
[61:10] down. It’s a pity. Sometimes it’s
[61:15] not about whether the person wants to
[61:17] pass it on; it’s about the
[61:18] suppression and destruction by the Ming
[61:20] Dynasty—they called it the "
[61:21] Prohibition and Destruction." Total
[61:26] destruction. Their methods were all
[61:29] very brutal. Ah.
[61:32] >> That’s why so many things couldn't be
[61:34] passed down to today; so much culture
[61:35] didn't survive to the present. Yes, it
[61:38] really is a tragedy. Yes, regarding
[61:40] this topic of father and son, I keep
[61:42] coming back to what you said back then.
[61:45] It is true that there is a stage where
[61:47] the conflict between father and son is
[61:49] especially intense and severe. However,
[61:52] I don't know if these young people will
[61:54] change their minds when they reach my
[61:56] age in the future. Back when I was in
[62:00] my thirties or forties, I would fight
[62:02] with my father so much that my mother
[62:04] would have heart palpitations just
[62:05] watching us. But now, when you look at
[62:10] my 80-year-old father, I truly look at
[62:12] him and think of a candle flickering in
[62:14] the wind. Really, I don't know why, but
[62:17] now I feel he has no flaws. And you
[62:19] know, as people age, their brains
[62:21] atrophy as well; he’s been in Beijing
[62:23] for two weeks now, right? He has
[62:25] already forgotten about his home back
[62:27] in Shijiazhuang; he has forgotten what
[62:29] the house he lived in looks like.
[62:31] Sometimes, elderly people also possess
[62:33] a certain kind of pride.
[62:34] >> That’s right. You know, there is a
[62:37] director I know named Ann Hui, who made
[62:39] a film called "A Simple Life." I asked
[62:42] her about it, since she has always
[62:43] lived with her mother. I asked, "What
[62:46] do you want to say to elderly people?"
[62:48] She said that when people get old, they
[62:50] must accept help from the young. It
[62:52] means that when people are old, they
[62:54] shouldn't be stubborn. At the time, I
[62:56] didn't quite understand that; I
[62:57] wondered why old people wouldn't just
[62:59] accept help from the young. Now that I
[63:01] am taking care of my father, I can
[63:03] understand you. Even when he is in that
[63:06] state, he still has his self-esteem; he
[63:08] doesn't want to lose that. If he
[63:11] weren't starting to lose his faculties,
[63:13] he would rather die than spend a penny
[63:15] of his children's money or be a burden.
[63:19] So you really have to persuade him that
[63:20] it's okay; you have to accept it.
[63:23] There’s a detail I remembered a few
[63:24] days ago that made me feel really
[63:26] heartbroken, and it’s about laundry
[63:28] —I asked him, "Why do you always
[63:29] insist on washing your clothes yourself
[63:31] ?" I thought he was just being stingy
[63:33] and afraid of wasting electricity. I
[63:34] said, "I throw a load in the washing
[63:36] machine every day, just wash yours with
[63:37] mine! Why won't you wash them together?
[63:40] " I said, "It costs the same for
[63:41] electricity and the same for water, why
[63:43] don't you just wash them with me?" I
[63:48] nagged him about it for two days, and
[63:49] finally he blurted out, "I know you
[63:51] young people think old people are dirty
[63:53] and smell like old age, so you don't
[63:55] want to mix your things with ours." Oh,
[64:00] when I heard that, I really felt...this
[64:03] is the kind of thing elderly people
[64:05] have, this kind of...
[64:07] >> self-esteem.
[64:10] >> Self-esteem, you see, so when you reach
[64:13] this point, I feel that no matter how
[64:15] many conflicts you had when you were
[64:17] young, when you see your parents in
[64:19] their twilight years, I truly don't
[64:20] know if you could still hold onto any
[64:23] resentment. I certainly couldn't
[64:26] anymore.
[64:27] >> These conflicts within family ties, yes
[64:29] , they are these kinds of educational
[64:30] conflicts. Let’s first talk about
[64:32] this educational conflict; if you set
[64:33] that as the premise, it’s actually
[64:35] quite easy to resolve. Because many
[64:37] years ago, I did an educational program
[64:39] for CCTV. It was quite funny at the
[64:41] time; on one platform there were all
[64:42] children, and on the other were all
[64:44] parents. Looking at them from above, I
[64:46] could see it very clearly. The whole
[64:49] group of children on that platform,
[64:51] about a hundred of them, were all
[64:52] sitting like this, and the parents on
[64:54] the other side were all doing this. All
[64:58] the parents were leaning forward, over
[64:59] a hundred parents were leaning forward,
[65:01] while the hundred or so children were
[65:03] all leaning back. You could see it very
[65:06] clearly from there, and then you would
[65:07] discover
[65:08] >> who was in the weaker position. It was
[65:10] very obvious; the parents were all the
[65:12] vulnerable ones. If a child spoke
[65:14] loudly, the parents wouldn't dare to
[65:15] make a sound, you know?
[65:17] >> There was no way around it. Parents and
[65:19] children, especially those in their
[65:21] rebellious phase, just couldn't
[65:22] communicate. When I did that show, I
[65:25] felt it was such a vivid image,
[65:26] reflecting the overall conflicts of
[65:28] society so clearly.
[65:31] >> Everything changes with the times, with
[65:33] the person, with age, and with
[65:34] physiological changes; our
[65:36] relationships with each other are
[65:37] constantly evolving.
[65:40] >> I get the feeling that you and Mr. Chen
[65:43] Qiang
[65:43] >> Towards the end, when you were with him
[65:46] , you were truly meticulous, 嗯,
[65:49] >> But sometimes, you also have to...you
[65:51] can't just do as he wishes; there must
[65:53] be some pushback, you must be firm, yes
[65:56] . Yes, no matter how headstrong he is,
[65:57] you still have to stand your ground. Do
[65:59] what’s best for him, he has become
[66:01] like a child again,
[66:02] >> Yes, yes, yes.
[66:03] >> Right? You really become...that’s
[66:06] father and son, it’s a circle, isn't
[66:08] it? Yes, especially, especially
[66:13] >> It was the first time he got seriously
[66:16] ill, a brain blockage, and when he was
[66:18] critically ill, my first feeling at
[66:20] that moment was a sudden sense that I
[66:22] had grown up another level! Reaching
[66:26] that point. When he was lying there, I
[66:30] genuinely felt, "Oh, all the burdens
[66:32] are on me now." Even for the old man, I
[66:37] had to take charge of everything and
[66:39] make decisions on his behalf.
[66:43] >> In the past, it wasn't my turn. He was
[66:46] in such good health; my parents were
[66:48] both people in excellent health, they
[66:49] hardly ever got sick in their lives, oh
[66:51] my.
[66:55] >> I used to think, "It's not my turn to
[66:57] take care of my parents, absolutely not
[66:59] ," it was hilarious, and then suddenly
[67:01] one day, when it happened, oh, I felt
[67:03] like I had grown up all of a sudden. Do
[67:08] you expect your son to take on this
[67:10] burden in the future? I don't know.
[67:13] >> It seems like parents of this
[67:15] generation all say, "I never expect my
[67:17] son to provide for me when I'm old."
[67:19] Well, that's true, because there's only
[67:21] one child.
[67:22] >> Unlike us, we had three siblings, right
[67:25] ? So, taking care of the elderly, they
[67:27] could manage it. But with just one
[67:29] person, how can you take care of them?
[67:30] Right? You just can't take care of them
[67:32] one-on-one. Does your son, Dayu, carry
[67:36] on your parenting style? With his next
[67:39] generation? It's alright. It's fine,
[67:43] our grandchildren are all very happy,
[67:45] all very happy. They all have their
[67:48] little temperaments, and that's quite
[67:50] good.
[67:51] >> That's very good.
[67:52] >> Look at that.
[67:53] >> They all have their own tempers, which
[67:55] is excellent. Yeah, I used to think the
[67:57] older generation was very strict, I
[67:59] don't know where I got that impression,
[68:01] but now it seems not, they were
[68:02] actually very wise.
[68:04] >> Right. Actually, there is wisdom there.
[68:06] >> Right.
[68:07] >> It is a kind of wisdom, I believe that,
[68:10] yes. Another thing is, you see, my
[68:14] father's generation, the education he
[68:16] gave me, what influenced me the most
[68:18] from him was what? His work ethic; he
[68:23] didn't teach me performance techniques,
[68:25] but methods of work. Regarding
[68:29] performance, he told me I could learn
[68:30] this from one person and that from
[68:32] another; it's ever-changing and
[68:34] multifaceted.
