…Or at least Beijing wishes it were so, judging by the amount that’s been spent on setting up hundreds of Confucius Institutes around the globe. Yet Beijing’s efforts have had little impact on China’s often problematic image on the world stage. Back in 2006 Professor Zhang Yiwu of Peking University wrote that "one Zhang Ziyi is more effective than ten thousand Confuciuses." But how about a clan of American rappers? C. Custer had an interesting post recently on China Geeks, pondering the vagaries of “soft power” and how it is most effective when not controlled by governments. Custer uses U.S. hip-hop group Wu-Tang Clan as an example of the way soft power is as much about appropriation by other cultures as nations selling pre-set visions of themselves.

Custer writes: “In early 1992, over a decade after Beijing’s soft power aspirations led to the founding of the first Confucius Institute, traditional Chinese culture found unintentional ambassadors (of a sort) in the unlikeliest of places. In the slums of Staten Island, a young Robert Diggs was forming hip-hop’s first real super-group, and he was using a Chinese aesthetic to help brand it.

The name ‘Wu-Tang Clan’ itself is, obviously, Chinese, originating from a kung fu film called Shaolin vs. Wu Tang. The group peppered their first album with audio clips from dubbed Chinese films (especially the aforementioned film), samples from traditional Chinese musical instruments, and esoteric references to kung fu legends… The final product might have left something to be desired, from a Chinese perspective. Probably, this was not exactly the image of China they wanted presented to the public… [but] Wu-Tang’s influence in spreading Chinese kung fu and even traditional Chinese music indicates something about soft power that Beijing may have missed; namely, that it is most effective when it is derivative and not directly controlled.”

Custer’s post makes an obvious point: few people are ever going to be interested in, or convinced by, any government’s version of their "national culture,” for the simple reason that a nation’s most stimulating, surprising and challenging cultural products are never going to be dreamed up by career bureaucrats or politicians trying to further their own political and economic interests. In addition, true "soft power" means a having a cultural influence that often manifests itself in surprising and unintended ways.

For example, one of the most fascinating aspects of Japanese pop culture since at least the 1950s has been its ability to absorb and reinvent foreign - especially U.S. - influences to produce something wholly unique. Clearly the U.S. has had a huge influence on Japanese culture since the Second World War, but not in ways necessarily "planned" by the American government or America's writers, filmmakers and musicians. Conversely, Japan's vibrant contemporary culture has little to do with the men who run the country.

Unfortunately, there’s little sign of the powers-that-be recognizing these cultural dynamics in China. If they ever catch on we could see something really interesting happening not just here but the world over – look at the impact tiny Hong Kong has had on world cinema. As C. Custer notes, “If RZA can spread the word about the Shaolin temple through a Christian country via dubbed fung fu tapes funneled into hip-hop albums and music videos, imagine what China’s vast army of creative people could do if they were unmuzzled and unleashed.”

You can read C. Custer’s full post here.