This month, the Chinese press and online forums are saturated with coverage of Charles Kao’s winning of the Nobel Prize in Physics. Yet another overseas Chinese scientist has snatched the prestigious prize, this temporary moment of shared glory is quickly turned into a more profound question: when would China produce its first indigenous Nobel Prize winner?
A commentary on Xinhua describes this psychology:
Every year, when the Nobel Prize winners are announced, the Chinese will become very sentimental. If a winner is of Chinese descendant, they will be very excited. But after a few days, this excitement will gradually cool down or even turn into indifference. When next year comes, this cycle will repeat.
詹晟 posted a question on an ifeng blog piece:
Some people said it is a kind of discrimination against Chinese– the Nobel Prize will not be given to Chinese, it will only be given to people with a certain citizenship. Therefore, a pre-requisite for Chinese to be awarded is to become an American citizen. But why are Chinese able to get the prize once they change citizenship?
This echoes with an article on 青青草香’s sina blog:
When we talk of an “American Chinese”, the keyword is not “American” but “Chinese”. After the fervent media reporting, we have the illusion that all Chinese are sharing the Nobel pride as well. Our fragile hearts are self-comforted.
Charles Kao is the eighth Chinese Nobel Prize winner. While we are feeling proud, should we ask the embarrassing question: why could Chinese win Nobel Prizes when they are in a foreign but not our own country?
A commentary by 丁果 on the Southern Metropolitan Weekend outlined a few structural problems of the Chinese academic environment:
China still lacks a free academic environment, which makes it difficult to nurture innovative talents; China lacks high-end basic research facilities, which makes it hard to attract Chinese to return to their own country; China lacks the social atmosphere to nurture groundbreaking ideas and a suitable community for leading scientists to settle down for long periods.
詹晟 and 青青草香 also discussed some other disturbing realities.
Look at the corrupted academic environment in China. There are so-called book publication amount of PhD mentors, each ranging from a few to dozens per year. Local governments like to employ foreign consultants for advice as it is a “stylish” act.
If a rigorous academic environment and an effective reward mechanism do not exist, even with the glory of being the “People’s Teacher”, most academics will leave the circle and join the commercial world.
We can blame a transforming China or the waves of materialism as being the causes of all the irregularities. But isn't it also related to our cultures or attitudes?
China is keen to use number. The number of published research papers is used to determine someone's academic quality, or to decide if a research student can proceed to the stage of thesis defense. Under this system, teachers and students alike have to publish a large amount of papers, with the accompanying result of widespread plagiarism. While China becomes the number one producer of academic dissertations, it may also be the number one producer of academic garbage.
Under the current education and research system, it is difficult for China to nurture liberal, independent and innovative scientists. Producing the first indigenous Chinese Nobel Prize winner will take some time.
In the collective English blog, the Fool's Mountain, there is also a hot discussion on “What Lies between Chinese Writers and the Nobel Prize”.
[Photo taken from nobelprize.org]