THE FAREWELL treats the decision to withhold a cancer diagnosis from a patient as a Chinese cultural practice. One character even quotes a supposed old Chinese saying to justify this practice. This tactic may seem unusual to an American viewer in 2019, but it was business as usual in America until the late 1970s. Susan Sontag, in 1978, wrote ILLNESS AS METAPHOR while recovering from breast cancer. She details the thinking behind such routines in that book. More recently, the second season of "Fargo" featured this issue. Although THE FAREWELL treats such withholding as a harmless issue of cultural relativity that, in the end, reflects positively on Chinese customs, what is actually under debate in this film is an OUTDATED custom, one that is deceptive, paternalistic, and stigmatizing toward illness and healthcare.
Zhao Shuzhen, who plays the cancer-diagnosed Nai Nai in the film, turns in a wonderful performance. I suppose it's not an especially challenging role to play a strong but sweet grandmother, but she does exude charm. The film, the autobiographical filmmakers, and the characters clearly love her, and that love is manipulated into the supposed motivation for their deception of her. (I ask you, when was the last time you lied to your lover and then, when caught, explained your bad behavior by saying, "I only did it because I love you!" How did that go over?)
Their withholding of her personal information is presented as a self-sacrifice, though it's not exactly clear what they're giving up in the sacrifice. They have to conceal their emotions (which they do a very poor job of anyway), but in exchange they get to continue selfishly enjoying their grandmother without having to deal with her cancer, her treatments, her grief, her desire to maybe do something different with her life now that she knows her health condition, etc., etc. This could all be a very interesting subject to examine in a film, as it's a wonderful source of tension; however, no alternative is ever really presented to the viewer. We know that Nai Nai wants to know the truth, yet we never see what might happen if she were to learn it--how she might feel, how she might respond, how she might deal with her illness. None of the other characters are ever truly tested; rather, they passively go along with the deception. In the end, the film presents their plan as having succeeded. A title screen abruptly announces that all these years later, Nai Nai is still alive (and still, even as her family is profiting from a film about her struggle, being lied to). This is meant to serve as prima facie evidence that they did the right thing, as though she would have obviously died if they had pursued some other plan. And since the decision is presented as a matter of Chinese culture (in contrast to American culture), the film thus becomes a victory for the Chinese way of doing things.
This is self-centered crap that's literally exploiting the grandmother. The philosophy espoused here is, "I know what's best for you, and I'm going to make those decisions--decisions that could literally cost you your life--regardless of your input, and, in fact, in direct contrast to your input." Such a philosophy is called paternalism because it tends to go hand in hand with misogyny. It's also a philosophy that, in this particular case, stigmatizes illness (better not to speak of it!), stigmatizes healthcare (doing nothing is sometimes better!), and literally robs a woman of her agency, her right to choose what to do with her body, her life, and her time.
This message is tidily tied up with general pro-Chinese sentiments. (The film is partially financed by China.) The film doesn't deny that the Chinese believe the American educational system to be superior, yet the main character's mother is depicted as extremely rude for bringing such matters up at an inappropriate time. The main character's depression is likewise presented as being derived from the trauma of having been separated from China against her will. All in all, one walks away with a positive view of China's views toward individual well-being... a harshly opposing view to what you might glean from other recent films like One Child Nation, An Elephant Sitting Still, American Factory, or Sister (a short by Siqi Song). The film could have been great--and certain technical qualities like the cinematography were, in fact, quite polished and enjoyable--if it had explored these issues in a way that was nuanced or at least actually interested in presenting counterarguments. This film instead gets a very low rating from me because it instead abandons such nuance for a tidy, propagandistic celebration of a (currently) autocratic society.
And on a side note: Awkwafina? She was one of the funniest hosts of "Saturday Night Live" in recent years, and she's generally quite the charismatic show stealer. All her humor and talent are squandered here, however. There's no range to her performance. All she does is pout. Why are people saying she deserves accolades? A comedian isn't a good actor simply because she's capable of frowning. While I wish her the best and look forward to her future performances, I simply don't get the esteem for her role in this awful film.
Zhao Shuzhen, who plays the cancer-diagnosed Nai Nai in the film, turns in a wonderful performance. I suppose it's not an especially challenging role to play a strong but sweet grandmother, but she does exude charm. The film, the autobiographical filmmakers, and the characters clearly love her, and that love is manipulated into the supposed motivation for their deception of her. (I ask you, when was the last time you lied to your lover and then, when caught, explained your bad behavior by saying, "I only did it because I love you!" How did that go over?)
Their withholding of her personal information is presented as a self-sacrifice, though it's not exactly clear what they're giving up in the sacrifice. They have to conceal their emotions (which they do a very poor job of anyway), but in exchange they get to continue selfishly enjoying their grandmother without having to deal with her cancer, her treatments, her grief, her desire to maybe do something different with her life now that she knows her health condition, etc., etc. This could all be a very interesting subject to examine in a film, as it's a wonderful source of tension; however, no alternative is ever really presented to the viewer. We know that Nai Nai wants to know the truth, yet we never see what might happen if she were to learn it--how she might feel, how she might respond, how she might deal with her illness. None of the other characters are ever truly tested; rather, they passively go along with the deception. In the end, the film presents their plan as having succeeded. A title screen abruptly announces that all these years later, Nai Nai is still alive (and still, even as her family is profiting from a film about her struggle, being lied to). This is meant to serve as prima facie evidence that they did the right thing, as though she would have obviously died if they had pursued some other plan. And since the decision is presented as a matter of Chinese culture (in contrast to American culture), the film thus becomes a victory for the Chinese way of doing things.
This is self-centered crap that's literally exploiting the grandmother. The philosophy espoused here is, "I know what's best for you, and I'm going to make those decisions--decisions that could literally cost you your life--regardless of your input, and, in fact, in direct contrast to your input." Such a philosophy is called paternalism because it tends to go hand in hand with misogyny. It's also a philosophy that, in this particular case, stigmatizes illness (better not to speak of it!), stigmatizes healthcare (doing nothing is sometimes better!), and literally robs a woman of her agency, her right to choose what to do with her body, her life, and her time.
This message is tidily tied up with general pro-Chinese sentiments. (The film is partially financed by China.) The film doesn't deny that the Chinese believe the American educational system to be superior, yet the main character's mother is depicted as extremely rude for bringing such matters up at an inappropriate time. The main character's depression is likewise presented as being derived from the trauma of having been separated from China against her will. All in all, one walks away with a positive view of China's views toward individual well-being... a harshly opposing view to what you might glean from other recent films like One Child Nation, An Elephant Sitting Still, American Factory, or Sister (a short by Siqi Song). The film could have been great--and certain technical qualities like the cinematography were, in fact, quite polished and enjoyable--if it had explored these issues in a way that was nuanced or at least actually interested in presenting counterarguments. This film instead gets a very low rating from me because it instead abandons such nuance for a tidy, propagandistic celebration of a (currently) autocratic society.
And on a side note: Awkwafina? She was one of the funniest hosts of "Saturday Night Live" in recent years, and she's generally quite the charismatic show stealer. All her humor and talent are squandered here, however. There's no range to her performance. All she does is pout. Why are people saying she deserves accolades? A comedian isn't a good actor simply because she's capable of frowning. While I wish her the best and look forward to her future performances, I simply don't get the esteem for her role in this awful film.