Wu, S. and Wang, W. (2020) ‘A Study on the Reconstruction of Cultural Confidence in Chinese Animation’, Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 416, pp. 287–290. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200316.065
This essay argues that Chinese animation needs to rebuild “cultural confidence” by reconnecting with traditional culture, national aesthetics, and contemporary storytelling, especially after decades of imitation of Japanese and American animation.
In A Study on the Reconstruction of Cultural Confidence in Chinese Animation, Sixue Wu and Wenting Wang discuss the decline and later recovery of Chinese animation through the idea of “cultural confidence.” The essay argues that Chinese animation once had a strong national style, especially in earlier works such as The Monkey King and Prince Nezha’s Triumph Against Dragon King. However, after the 1980s, Chinese animation gradually lost its clear cultural identity because of market pressure, talent loss, and the strong influence of Japanese and American animation. According to the authors, many Chinese animated works became too focused on technology, commercial success, or imitation, while neglecting deeper cultural meaning.
One point I found important is the essay’s criticism of “technology covering up the story.” This is a useful idea because animation is not only about visual quality or advanced production methods. A technically impressive film can still feel empty if it does not have a strong story, memorable characters, or meaningful cultural expression. The essay uses examples such as Moby Bius Ring and Magic Brush Maliang to show that simply copying Western 3D animation styles cannot guarantee success. This connects to a larger problem in cultural production: when creators focus too much on catching up with global standards, they may lose the local qualities that make their work distinctive.
The essay also discusses the importance of traditional Chinese cultural resources, including classical literature, folk culture, ethnic minority culture, festivals, symbols, and aesthetics. I agree with this argument because Chinese culture offers a huge amount of material for animation, but these elements should not be used only as surface decoration. For example, adding Chinese architecture, costumes, or mythological names is not enough. A successful animation should also understand the values, emotions, and worldview behind those cultural materials. The authors’ discussion of The Monkey King: Hero is Back, Big Fish & Begonia, and Ne Zha shows that modern Chinese animation can become more powerful when it combines traditional cultural sources with contemporary themes and modern narrative methods.
However, I think the essay sometimes presents foreign influence in a slightly negative or defensive way. For example, it describes films like Kung Fu Panda as using Chinese cultural elements through a Western cultural framework. This criticism is understandable, but foreign adaptation is not always simply “cultural erosion.” It can also show how Chinese cultural symbols travel globally and become part of international popular culture. The more important question may not be whether foreign creators use Chinese elements, but how Chinese creators can respond with works that are equally creative, emotionally strong, and globally understandable.
Overall, this essay is useful because it explains Chinese animation not only as an entertainment industry, but also as a cultural field connected to identity, tradition, modernization, and globalization. Its central message is that Chinese animation should not reject technology or international influence, but it must develop from a stronger understanding of its own cultural roots. For me, the most valuable idea is that cultural confidence does not mean simply repeating tradition. Instead, it means transforming traditional culture into new forms that can speak to contemporary audiences while still carrying a recognizable Chinese cultural temperament.