User:Adambletcher/sandbox

Initial Reactions from Chinese Readership
During the initial publication of Fang Fang’s posts, there were several polarized responses from Chinese readers. Some readers questioned Fang Fang’s authenticity of her historical accounts. Several believed Fang Fang was not accurately conveying legitimate and unbiased accounts of Wuhan’s lockdown, as a result of this, many believed Fang Fang’s posts denied the true efforts being made by the Chinese government. Additionally, several have criticized Fang Fang for her critical tone of the Chinese government and claimed that she is unpatriotic. In Fang Fang’s February 17th 2020 submission, Fang Fang describes a response from a reader who asks why her daily posts are primarily focused on her daily life, rather than including mainstream news which celebrates China’s progress against the virus and the government's heroic deeds.

On March 18th 2020, a significant attack that was directed towards Fang Fang in a form of a letter which was posted on social media by an anonymous Chinese high school student which caught widespread readership. In this letter to Fang Fang, the alleged 16-year-old shares their doubts of Fang Fang’s role and responsibilities as a writer during the Wuhan lockdown, shames Fang Fang for exposing the pitfalls of the Chinese government’s handling of the lockdown, and guilts Fang Fang for being ungrateful to her country. Aside from publicly condemning Fang Fang for exposing the Chinese government, the purpose of this letter was to justify the concealment of the unpleasant happenings during the Wuhan lockdown.

At the time prior to the announcement of the publication of Wuhan Diary into English and German, supportive voices for Fang Fang's posts outweighed the negative. Residents of Wuhan have expressed their support for Fang Fang’s posts, as they believed these posts accurately illustrates Wuhan resident’s experiences and emotions during the lockdown. In a South China Morning Post interview, a 63-year-old Wuhan resident who is in support of Fang Fang, believes the critics of Fang Fang's posts misunderstand Fang Fang’s intentions behind her criticisms. The resident explains that her criticism do not represent a distain for neither China as a whole or its people, but rather a criticism of the government. Other contemporary Chinese writers including Yan Lianke and Zhang Kangkang, have also expressed their support for Fang Fang. On February 21st 2020, in an online lecture taught by Lianke at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Lianke conveyed to his masters students of the importance of remembering and documenting individual memories and experiences, as he believes they provide a tool for not repeating both individual and collective mistakes. Lianke goes on to criticize the celebration-focused media that was being produced by Chinese media during the midst of the lockdown, and asserts that this narrative is harmful since it shifts collective awareness to celebrating heroic deeds from investigating those who had died. Lianke suggests writers like Fang Fang are necessary since she provides personal accounts to history, therefore providing real context to the historical events of the Wuhan lockdown.

Chinese Reaction to the International Publications
On April 8th 2020, it was announced that Fang Fang’s posts would be published by HarperCollins in the US and would be available for presale on Amazon. Additionally, Hoffmann and Campe would publish a German translated version soon after. This announcement caused great commotion, conversations surrounding Fang Fang were revitalized on social media and created a surge of overwhelmingly negative debates. At the time of this announcement, infection numbers began to lessen and lockdown restrictions in Wuhan began to be lifted. However at the same time, international communities were experiencing rising infection cases and restrictions were put into place. Due to the widespread infections across the globe, international leaders criticized China for their initial mishandling of the outbreak. With the creation of negative connotations of China and the virus made by international communities, including the US government’s naming of the virus as the ‘Chinese virus’ and ‘Kung Flu,’ caused a surge of narratives which framed Fang Fang as being a liar and a dangerous conspirator against the state. Several critics believed Fang Fang’s negative and critical portrayal of Chinese government’s handling of the outbreak would provide more evidence for China's fault for spread and justified the international community’s anger towards China. They believed Wuhan Diary would create further escalating tension between China and the international communities and would potentially damage these relationships. Critics also believed that Fang Fang was exploiting the dead at expense of her hunger for fame. Additionally, some critics believe that Fang Fang has conspired with the Western powers and had been paid by the CIA to attack China through writing deceitful depictions of the Wuhan lockdown. Although there were still some negative and neutral stances towards this publication, the number of negative opinions overwhelmingly outweighed other opinions.

Government Response
According to the South China Morning Post, there has been little response to Wuhan Diary from government officials. Wu Qiang, an independent political analyst in Beijing, claims that the negative attention placed on Fang Fang’s posts was a tactic to shift public attention from pressuring the government to partake in a in depth investigation of the outbreak. Wu describes “channeling people’s attention into nationalistic sentiment can effectively offset people questioning what is the real social justice after such a severe disaster.” Furthermore, Wu suggests that despite the backlash Fang Fang has endured and due to her past accolades, she is still a trusted voice. Wu explains this logic to be that “many voices from Wuhan have been silenced. The fact that her work was allowed to survive is the art of censorship: to let out a relatively moderate voice to avoid the embarrassment of a completely blank canvass.”

Synopsis
Fang Fang’s Wuhan Diary is a 380-page book that is divided into three sections by months January, February, and March. Wuhan Diary collects 8 weeks of Fang Fang’s nightly entries from her social media. Fang Fang captures her first-hand personal experience of living through the Wuhan lockdown, including her opinions on daily events and news she encounters. Additionally, Fang Fang depicts the psychological challenges of self isolation and living through a time of great uncertainty, while attempting to provide a sense of empathy and hope for her readers who are facing similar experiences. Fang Fang also "also speaks out against social injustice, abuse of power, and other problems which impeded the response to the epidemic and gets herself embroiled in online controversies because of it.”

Style
Wuhan Diary is written in first person and is not written in the typical diary style of writing ‘Dear Diary,’ but the tone and structure of her posts is casual and is not structured in a particular format. Each entry is divided by date and will often start with a single sentence that reflects the content of that entry. In addition to Fang Fang sharing her perspective on news or information surrounding the virus from her ‘doctor friends’, often she will share about her encounters with her friends and family, her online critics, the weather, what she sees, and anecdotes of Wuhan.

Anti-Fang Fang Sentiment
The main criticism of Wuhan Diary is that it exaggerates and embellishes the true state of affairs in Wuhan at the time for the purpose of “handing a knife” to Western media. The motivation for Fang Fang was simply greed and she was more than happy to sell-out her country for international dollars.

Many argue that Wuhan Diary is a criticism of the sociopolitical inner workings of China and the CCP. The main arguments for this are that Wuhan Diary is loaded with embellishments and outright lies that support this criticism. People also argue that a crisis such as the Covid-19 pandemic is not the time to be writing expose diaries about the government. The quick translation and publication of the novel is a cornerstone for many of the accusations and conspiracy theories levied against Wuhan Diary and Fang Fang. The sociopolitical commentaries and undertones in Wuhan Diary acted as a lighting road

There have been claims that Wuhan Diary, its subsequent translation and being published, had some involvement by the United States government. Owing to its quick turn around from a simple collection of Weibo posts to a fully fledged and translated novel. Despite these accusations there is zero evidence that Fang Fang, Michael Berry, or any one from the publishing company, Harper-Collins, had any contact with anyone from the United States government.

Many critics have levied accusations against Wuhan Diary that were never mentioned, implicit or explicit, in the novel. Such as the accusation that Wuhan Diary reinforces the Western perception that this virus started in Wuhan and is a ‘China virus’. Therefore the book argues China should repay the international community with some kind of reparations, or that Wuhan Diary is some kind of commentary on US-China relations. None of this kind of political discussion can be found anywhere within the novel. However, the book quickly began a defining point of one’s character, a clear distinction developing between those who supported Fang Fang and her novel versus those who saw Fang Fang and the novel as a betrayal of her country. Allegedly, this divisive topic has torn some families apart.

Publication Date
The initial publication date of Wuhan Diary was planned for May 19th, (2020) however two days later on May 21st was Two Sessions(LiangHui), a large annual conference held by the CCP. Despite the publication date of Wuhan Diary being announced before the date of Two Sessions was announced, people speculated and levied accusations against Michael Berry and the publishing company(Harper Collins) that this was an intentional decision; in an attempt to disrupt the upcoming LiangHui. These accusations “generated dozens of news stories, and hundreds of Weibo attacks”. The publication date would be changed to June 2020 in an attempt to “avoid the slightest semblance that we might be trying to do something like that”

Big Character Posters
Some big character posters criticizing Fang Fang, and particularly the overseas publication of Wuhan Diary, began to appear around Wuhan. The authenticity and scale of these posters is unverifiable.

Book Reviews
Even before Wuhan Diary was published, many negative book reviews, written in both English and Chinese, were released internationally. However, many of these book reviews, such as Great Wuhan But Bad Diary and 方方日记批判, have since disappeared from international markets and are difficult to find.

English
The original posts on Weibo and WeChat were translated into English by Michael Berry, a Professor of Asian Languages & Culture at UCLA and the director of UCLA Center for Chinese Studies. Berry has translated numerous Chinese texts, such as The Song of Everlasting Sorrow and Remains of Life. Berry began translating Fang Fang’s Weibo posts in February 2020, stating “I immediately decided to put all of my other projects aside and began translating her blog; it was a story the world needed to hear.”

German
Wuhan diary was translated into German by Michael Kahn-Ackermann and published by Hoffmann und Campe on the 30th of May, 2020. Michael has a long history of study and translating Chinese literature, studying Asian studies and language at both the University of Munich and Peking University. Most known for his role in founding a Goethe-Institut in Beijing in 1988. Michael has translated numerous works by renowned Chinese writer Zhang Jie. On the 2nd of May, 2022 another one of Michael’s translations of Fang Fang’s works, Wütendes Feuer, was published.