RAS-1991 — Page 88

RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 All AI Reviewed

68

can demonstrate the relationship between arts exchanges and political, and cultural developments in domestic-bilateral terms. To meet that end, I will analyse the stimulus for arts exchanges between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America and examine the consequences of these exchanges. I maintain that arts exchanges, the product of foreign and cultural policies, are generated by political and international developments. They are affected by these developments, though there may be some time lag between major policy changes and a consequent development in the area of arts exchanges. On the other hand, the two governments, consciously and sometimes directly, were involved in this enterprise, aiming at creating a cultural imagery in order to promote what they consider their respective national interests. Nevertheless, I hold that arts exchanges are not passive. Rather, they have their own impact on affairs in domestic cultural and political life as well as in bilateral relations. In certain cases, this impact generates a new political international environment.

Arts exchanges in Sino-American relations are seldom mentioned by political leaders, nor are they sufficiently explored in academic writings. This is because arts exchanges hold a very low position in the two countries' foreign policy priorities. There are always more urgent and apparently bigger issues to handle. However, arts exchanges as part of cultural relations stand for a major facet of the Sino-American general relationship and they often serve as a barometer of the development, and more importantly, the nature of such a relationship. In the period between 1949 and 1972, arts exchanges were non-existent. Artists in the United States were biased against a communist China or hindered by the U.S. government from visiting China. Simultaneously, China made few efforts to send performing groups or arts exhibitions to the United States. In a like manner, there were no exchanges of movies.

Before 1972, the United States regarded China as a major antagonist. Anti-Communism and hostility to China had characterized every president's foreign policy since Truman. In American domestic politics, anti-Communism had been a constant theme, especially dominating politics in the early fifties when McCarthyism was strong. When writing later on his experience in this period, John King Fairbank reflected: "It became second nature to indicate that one was safely anti-Communist." McCarthyism did not last long, but it left a shadow over the succeeding decades.

114

Edit History

2026-05-13 06:33:02 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
68 can demonstrate the relationship between arts exchanges and political, and cultural developments in domestic-bilateral terms. To meet that end, I will analyse the stimulus for arts exchanges between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America and examine the consequences of these exchanges. I maintain that arts exchanges, the product of foreign and cultural policies, are generated by political and international developments. They are affected by these developments, though there may be some time lag between major policy changes and a consequent development in the area of arts exchanges. On the other hand, the two governments, consciously and sometimes directly, were involved in this enterprise, aiming at creating a cultural imagery in order to promote what they consider their respective national interests. Nevertheless, I hold that arts exchanges are not passive. Rather, they have their own impact on affairs in domestic cultural and political life as well as in bilateral relations. In certain cases, this impact generates a new political international environment. Arts exchanges in Sino-American relations are seldom mentioned by political leaders, nor are they sufficiently explored in academic writings. This is because arts exchanges hold a very low position in the two countries' foreign policy priorities. There are always more urgent and apparently bigger issues to handle. However, arts exchanges as part of cultural relations stand for a major facet of the Sino-American general relationship and they often serve as a barometer of the development, and more importantly, the nature of such a relationship. In the period between 1949 and 1972, arts exchanges were non-existent. Artists in the United States were biased against a communist China or hindered by the U.S. government from visiting China. Simultaneously, China made few efforts to send performing groups or arts exhibitions to the United States. In a like manner, there were no exchanges of movies. Before 1972, the United States regarded China as a major antagonist. Anti-Communism and hostility to China had characterized every president's foreign policy since Truman. In American domestic politics, anti-Communism had been a constant theme, especially dominating politics in the early fifties when McCarthyism was strong. When writing later on his experience in this period, John King Fairbank reflected: "It became second nature to indicate that one was safely anti-Communist." McCarthyism did not last long, but it left a shadow over the succeeding decades. 114
Baseline (Original)
68 can demonstrate the relationship between arts exchanges and political, and cultural developments in domestic-bilateral terms. To meet that end, I will analyse the stimulus for arts exchanges between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America and examine the consequences of these exchanges. I maintain that arts exchanges, the product of foreign and cultural policies, are generated by political and international developments. They are affected by these developments, though there may be some time lag between major policy changes and a consequent development in the area of arts exchanges. On the other hand, the two governments, consciously and sometimes directly, were involved in this enterprise, aiming at creating a cultural imagery in order to promote what they consider their respective national interests Nevertheless, I hold that arts exchanges are not passive. Rather, they have their own impact on affairs in domestic cultural and political life as well as in bilateral relations. In certain cases, this impact generates a new political international environment. Arts exchanges in Sino-American relations are seldom mentioned by political leaders, nor are they sufficiently explored in academic writings. This is because arts exchanges hold a very low position in the two countries' foreign policy priorities. There are always more urgent and apparently bigger issues to handle. However, arts exchanges as part of cultural relations stand for a major facet of the Sino-American general relationship and they often serve as a barometer of the development, and more importantly, the nature of such a relationship. In the period between 1949 and 1972, arts exchanges were non-existent. Artists in the United States were biased against a communist China or hindered by the U.S. government from visiting China. Simultaneously, China made few efforts to send performing groups or arts exhibitions to the United States. In a like manner, there were no exchanges of movies. Before 1972, the United States regarded China as a major antagonist. Anti-Communism and hostility to China had characterized every president's foreign policy since Truman. In American domestic politics, anti-Communism had been a constant theme, especially dominating politics in the early fifties when McCarthyism was strong. When writing later on his experience in this period, John King Fairbank reflected: "It became second nature to indicate that one was safely anti- Communist." McCarthyism did not last long, but it left a shadow over the succeeding decades. 114
2026-05-13 06:33:02 · Baseline
View content

68

can demonstrate the relationship between arts exchanges and political, and cultural developments in domestic-bilateral terms. To meet that end, I will analyse the stimulus for arts exchanges between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America and examine the consequences of these exchanges. I maintain that arts exchanges, the product of foreign and cultural policies, are generated by political and international developments. They are affected by these developments, though there may be some time lag between major policy changes and a consequent development in the area of arts exchanges. On the other hand, the two governments, consciously and sometimes directly, were involved in this enterprise, aiming at creating a cultural imagery in order to promote what they consider their respective national interests Nevertheless, I hold that arts exchanges are not passive. Rather, they have their own impact on affairs in domestic cultural and political life as well as in bilateral relations. In certain cases, this impact generates a new political international environment.

Arts exchanges in Sino-American relations are seldom mentioned by political leaders, nor are they sufficiently explored in academic writings. This is because arts exchanges hold a very low position in the two countries' foreign policy priorities. There are always more urgent and apparently bigger issues to handle. However, arts exchanges as part of cultural relations stand for a major facet of the Sino-American general relationship and they often serve as a barometer of the development, and more importantly, the nature of such a relationship. In the period between 1949 and 1972, arts exchanges were non-existent. Artists in the United States were biased against a communist China or hindered by the U.S. government from visiting China. Simultaneously, China made few efforts to send performing groups or arts exhibitions to the United States. In a like manner, there were no exchanges of movies.

Before 1972, the United States regarded China as a major antagonist. Anti-Communism and hostility to China had characterized every president's foreign policy since Truman. In American domestic politics, anti-Communism had been a constant theme, especially dominating politics in the early fifties when McCarthyism was strong. When writing later on his experience in this period, John King Fairbank reflected: "It became second nature to indicate that one was safely anti- Communist." McCarthyism did not last long, but it left a shadow over the succeeding decades.

114

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.