I have to admit that at first this movie exhibited a strange feeling for me: the mixed use of Cantonese and Mandarin by a Eurasian claiming herself to have been living in China for several years, the emphasis that this romance happened in Hong Kong, an exotic beautiful symbol of eastern Asia with audiences seldom see Hong Kong people as main characters, and the existence of shallowness for stereotypic obedient woman in Suyin, a female intellectual lived through harsh life and constant cultural dilemma.
However, this feeling disappeared after I read the book excerpt, where the context of Hong Kong society, the identity of non-Asian people living in Hong Kong and Suyin’s subtle psychological mechanism are reasonably illustrated. So how does this adaptation reflect certain historical ideology?
Firstly, the movie remodles characters in order to categorize then-current political views. By Americanizing Mark Elliot in terms of both his nationality and personality as well as simplified Suyin’s thought and experience, the movie narrows down the complicated conflict and conciliation between western and eastern cultures into a liberate-liberated relation between America and China. Mark, according to the book, is an English, who felt “un-at-home with Americans” because of their “fat, and soft and too well-fed” and “yet to be tempered by hardship and misfortune”. Suyin, too, appeared with her deep understanding of Chinese (Hong Kong people) personality as well as thorough analysis for the missionaries fleeing from Communist China being afraid and unwilling. Branding Mark with American identity based on his freedom as a western correspondent increases the conjunction among his political, racial and sexual advantages. Otherwise, this would be a promotion of British colonial ideology. Apart from the above obvious two remodeling, there are minor changes of characters and their aim such as removing Suyin’s daughter in order to reduce her connection with Chinese identity and increase the accessibility for Mark, the symbolized America.
Secondly, for rhythm and stress of plot, it seems that the movie strives to emphasize the Americanized liberation of Suyin by weighting more on her romance with Mark and abbreviating her in-depth consideration of her own life and the surrounding. The same thing happened to Mark’s last meditation about Communist, war and humanity. More or less what the movie is trying to achieve are flattening the character and embodying them with the idea that “China was an aggressive, expansionist power that threatened the security of its noncommunist neighbors”, and of course, the peace of the world.
Finally, the attitude towards Chinese Communist is shifted from prudently against with rethinking and tolerance to strongly against, which is also a sign of political propaganda.
America in 1950s was heavily worried about the rising of communism in China, to build its confidence in both practical and psychological ways, it constructed military alliances along China’s borders and at the same time, making movies like Love is a Many-Splendored Thing.
