Reading Response 6

1. The two dimensions of symbolic violence discussed by Teo in relation to the Election films; first dimension is symbolic violence that contains symbols, according to the ritual and the law of the triads, the second dimension is the symbolic violence of male domination, which is the invisible repressive violence.
2. It is the first time he wholly deals with the inner political mechanism of the triads. It is distinct localized version of the genre because it deals with Wo Sing Society, which is specific self-governing city within the Chinese state. The parallels, Wo Sing Society do follow their own rules of behavior and govern their own territory. The depiction of elections is the contrast, since Hong Kong has no elections. General elections have worked in Hong Kong since the 1997 transition by not being democratic.
3. Teo argues that Election 2 is more political of the two films because of its conclusion that reveals China’s hand in the lawmaking agency of violence perpetrated in that film. Chinese government is against democracy in Hong Kong. The figure Shi reflects the collusion between the Chinese government and the Hong Kong triads in protecting their respective vested interests in Hong Kong. I am still a little confused on the Chinese government, with them having Hong Kong as a province but Hong Kong governs itself, but doesn’t have elections? I have to do some more research.
4. Violence in its mythical manifestations throws a problematic light on lawmaking violence: it illuminates fate. Fate is the law and the rituals of the triads and inasmuch as the triads are institution, it manifests as the density machine.
5. Yin violence is a feminized kind and yang violence is gunfire, violence in male dominated films. Election films stray from genre conventions because there are no guns used in the Election films.