In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

2 THE (IM)POSSIBILITY OF AN INSTITUTIONAL CRITIQUE: CHINA BEHIND BEVERLE HOUSTO N (1994 , 271 ) ask s abou t th e 'proble m o f Doroth y Arzner': How can th e female auteu r be 'positione d i n a history o f fil m that i s the histor y o f the structur e an d developmen t o f its institution s and practices' ? The ambition s o f The Arch attempt a critique o f sexist and feudalistic ideologies and seek to use Tang's interpretation of Chinese culture t o challeng e th e existin g Chines e cinemati c institution s an d practices. By bringing thes e interrogation s fro m a period dram a t o th e contemporary present, Tang's second film, China Behind, further pushe s the boundaries of the socio-political institution s to such an extent tha t it wa s banne d b y th e Hon g Kon g colonia l governmen t whe n i t wa s completed in 1974. China Behind has never been theatrically released in Hong Kong, Taiwan, or mainland China. 1 While studying Hong Kong women's entitlement to land ownership through th e Ne w Territorie s Inheritanc e Law , sociologist Caro l Jone s (1995, 187 ) concludes : Examining the history of women's issues in Hong Kong alerts us to the fact that a highly conservative version of culture has suited the interests of both the colonized and colonizing male elites. Additionally it alerts us to the fact that questions about the status of women in society are inextricably also questions about ownership of property and the exercise of power within that society. My discussion on female an d feminist authorshi p i n Hong Kong in th e 1960s and 1970 s is inevitably also a study on cultural ownership and the 68 Filmin g Margins exercise o f power. To further understan d th e possibilities an d limit s of Tang's authorship, it is crucial to examine the operations of the colonising political institution s a s well as the colonised, cultural institutions , an d the ways that thes e institutions, dominated b y mostly male, or I would say, 'male-identified' , elite s hav e worke d t o reinforc e an d perpetuat e one another . Thi s chapte r addresse s fou r interrelate d institution s an d historical practices of Chinese and Hong Kong cinemas, in relation to a reading o f the subversion s an d challenge s tha t China Behind posed t o these institutions . Thi s fil m seek s t o depoliticis e a n over-politica l narrative and to repoliticise it by gender. The institutions and practices discussed are: the traditional focus on Chinese cinema as a medium fo r ideological communication an d political mobilisation, the advocacy of social an d socialis t realism s i n Chines e cinema , th e studio-base d production structure in Hong Kong cinema, and film censorship policies in Hong Kong. In order to map Tang's authorship i n a more integrate d manner, I also discuss the development o f her concerns from Th e Arch to China Behind, especially with regard to the discourse of identity politics on China an d Hong Kong in the late 1960 s and early 1970s , when th e two film s wer e produced . Throug h thes e argument s I illuminat e ho w these film s contribut e t o a culturally an d historicall y specifi c feminis t authorship of Tang Shu Shuen . Cinema a s Revolutionar y Too l The Ma y Fourt h Movemen t i n 191 9 sought t o revolutionis e Chines e language, literature, and art, first and foremost, throug h its advocacy of the use of the vernacular in all aspects of life. When i t became possible for intellectual s t o rea d an d produc e literatur e i n th e vernacular , naturalistic spoke n dram a wa s brought t o the stag e and, soo n after , t o the screen . I n th e wak e of the Japanese Imperia l Army's invasio n an d seizure o f northeas t Chin a i n 1931 , an d th e Japanes e bombin g o f Shanghai in 1932, May Fourth intellectuals, interested in...

Share