Both the First and Second Opium Wars were fought in the
1800s for similar reasons. In both cases, a Western imperialist power (Britain
in the first war, both Britain and France in the second war) sought Chinese
resources (such as silk and porcelain). The Chinese, under dynastic governance,
were largely self-sufficient and did not see benefit in trading with the
Western powers.
In order to create demand for Western goods, thereby
incentivizing trade, the Western powers essentially got the Chinese hooked on
opium. Opium is often converted to heroin, and thus can take the form of an
addictive chemical drug. Conflicts ensued; many Chinese officials were wary of
the addiction, while Western powers used the dependency as an opportunity for achieving
their own economic objectives (such as the opening of Chinese ports).
Given this information, certain parallels, though admittedly
not perfect, do seem to exist between the Opium trade and the Hosts’ Language
addiction in Embassytown.
To begin, in both cases, there exists an addiction to
something foreign, introduced by the party seeking to control the other party. In
the Opium War, that something is Opium, a chemical drug. In Embassytown,
the Hosts are addicted to the Language used by EzRa, a non-identical Ambassador
who is unlike the other Ambassadors.
Britain and France during the Opium Wars, which occurred in
the mid-1800s, were at the height of imperialism. Imperialism benefited Britain
and France because it gave them access to needed goods from other countries. In
the case of China, however, they found difficulty in gaining access to Chinese
goods. China did not need anything from Britain or France; therefore, Britain
and France had to manufacture dependency, through the introduction of Opium and
the subsequent Chinese Opium addiction, in order to create trade.
In Embassytown, Bremen is the core of the Terre
empire, and it holds authority over its colonies, including Embassytown. Given
that there seems to be no shortage of doppel Ambassadors, it’s reasonable to
assume that the creation of a non-identical Ambassador by Bremen was
deliberate. Furthermore, implications of the link between EzRa and colonial
domination are hinted when Avice describes Ra as an “an officer and an agent of
a colonial power” (120). Furthermore, in numerous instances, references are
made to the Hosts’ goods, from which the Terre benefit. One such example is
when Avice describes, “A long way off were steppes where herds of semiwild
factories ran, which twice each long year Ariekene scientist-gauchos would
corral. We hoped to find a few of these cowboy bioriggers left, to trade their
creatures’ offspring” (195). Parallels between the Opium War and the novel are also seen when, in the novel,
violence breaks out between and among the Terre and Hosts as a result of the Hosts' addiction.
It’ll be interesting to see how the conflict continues and
to (hopefully) learn of Bremen’s intention in sending EzRa to Embassytown.
The world of Bremen and Embassytown also parallels in ways with George Orwell’s Oceania and Airstrip One in 1984. Both represent a sort of mysterious future world where many facets of society are inherently foreign to us and the language, in the case of 1984, Newspeak, contain words not yet to be invented. While Airstrip One is under the power of a plainly totalitarian state, Bremen’s deception is less obvious until the arrival of EzRa.
ReplyDeleteAvice does not even recognize the secrets, like the infirmary, and deceit, the creation of EzRa, that have plagued her city until the introduction of the God-drug and like Winston, does not realize until later in life the need to take control of their fate lest Bremen/Big Brother make change impossible.
Unlike 1984, Avice leads Embassytown from the destruction EzRa, EzCal and Bremen caused and reinvents their society in a way that Winston and Julia could not. The unification and empathy created between Avice’s forces and the Ariekei allowed them to not only stop the addiction to the God-drug but also grow completely around it by creating the new Language. In a way, they create a completely new Embassytown not reliant on Ambassadors and able to resist an impeding coup from Bremen.
I think that the parallels between these two are very interesting, and it does help give clarity to the story itself. Considering the idea of lying as something more tangible, in this case, opium, helps to put the story and the addiction into some quantifiable measurement.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of manufactured dependency is definitely one we see fairly often, even in today's world. While this happens more often in the context of supply and demand, it is also a tool which governments may use to gain control over their populace as well. Whether this be through regulated control of gas for cars, or any other product needed for daily life, the dependency would give the government a much stronger hold on its people, unless rebellion occurred.
In the case of this story, the addiction to EzRa’s speech, as suggested by the blogger, could very likely have been purposefully done. However, because control is not able to be maintained and supply and demand cannot be met, among several other issues, rebellion develops. This, like with the Opium War leads to violence and chaos.
It is interesting, therefore to consider the parallels between this story and any form of supply and demand today, because without careful regulation, there are many ways in which rioting, or other forms of protest could occur. I am curious as to whether there are any other governments today experiencing wars similar to that of the Opium War, because of manufactured dependency.