A Story of Chinese Laborers that Transcends Binary Morality
During the screening of "Detective Chinatown 1900," I was constantly worried that the film would fall into the trap of individual heroism narratives. The plot emphasized that the fate of the Chinese community in America was directly tied to whether the protagonists could uncover the true culprit. This narrative structure often presents a clear distinction between good and evil, with a group of heroes fighting against a group of villains. However, systemic racism is not the result of a single villain's conspiracy but rather a collaborative structure driven by economic interests. Reducing the conflict to "villainous politicians + ignorant mobs" avoids addressing the symbiotic relationship between capitalism and racism. The idea that solving a single murder case could determine the fate of all Chinese Americans simplifies complex political and economic issues into a technical operation that only the detective protagonist, Qin Fu, can perform. This implies that the systematic persecution of Chinese people is due to their lack of intelligence, at least not being as smart as Qin Fu. This aligns perfectly with neoliberal ideology, which describes systemic issues as personal failures, as Zigmunt Bauman once said.
However, "Detective Chinatown 1900" does not end there. It adds a true ending after the dust settles, subverting the traditional narrative of individual heroism. By deconstructing the heroic narrative, it also demystifies ideological illusions, with a critical impact far beyond the surface-level "reversal" effect.
Throughout the revelation of the murder's truth, the film emphasizes concepts like the rule of law, which actually sets the stage for the final reversal. Law is never a neutral value carrier but a battlefield for the interests of ruling groups. The white opponents of the Chinese Exclusion Act are not motivated by moral awakening but by the need for labor exploitation by Mr. Weiman. The so-called truth and justice advocated by police and journalists are merely a cover for capital redistribution. When this cover is lifted, the hypocrisy of procedural justice is exposed. The truth Qin Fu uncovers and the speech Bai Xuanling prepares are just laughable decorations in front of the transaction of interests. This treatment is even more brutal than "House of Cards," which at least allows the protagonist to win by manipulating procedures. "Detective Chinatown 1900" directly reveals that procedures themselves are toys of power.
Through this revelation, the film transcends the binary moral narrative of good and evil. Supporting the Chinese Exclusion Act is certainly bad, but those who oppose it are not necessarily good. The fate of the act ultimately depends on labor market supply and demand, not moral or legal principles. Grant's failure stems from his proposals conflicting with capitalist economic needs, not because he is immoral. Racism is tolerable, but it is intolerable to harm interests. Therefore, in a capitalist system, there is no such thing as a benevolent ruler. The simple opposition between "rule of law vs. Racism" established in the first half of the film is reconfigured in the end as a political realism narrative between racial union representatives and capitalists. In this narrative, there is no place for heroes. The climax that gives viewers the illusion of a small person changing history is casually mocked by the ending. Qin Fu's ability to uncover the truth with the help of Mr. Weiman does not affect the abolition of the act. He doesn't even save the life of the suspect Bai Zhenbang. Everything in the film is redundant decorative plot in this story, nothing more than a clown performance.
Thus, the film completes a triple deconstruction of law, morality, and heroism. Coupled with Grant's use of his daughter's death to destroy the concept of family first, it achieves a post-colonial parody targeting American mainstream values. It uses Hollywood language to mock the American myth and its four pillars, using mock but ineffective courtroom trials and parliamentary speeches to mock the ritualistic display of American legal procedural justice, using mock but ineffective stories of human kindness and moral awakening to defeat evil to mock the American myth that progress comes from moral purity, and using mock but ineffective last-minute rescues to mock the individualistic heroism of pure clowns. All of this stems from a completely unrelated family tragedy.
When the true ending is revealed, it is not Qin Fu but Bai Xuanling who directly learns the truth. Why doesn't the film design for Qin Fu, the detective, to face the truth directly? Because Qin Fu is actually a modern audience's costume, lacking a real connection to historical trauma. His exemption from suffering makes him a tourist in history, and such a character is not qualified to be the subject of historical narrative. Therefore, the parts of the film that focus on patriotism are relatively restrained to avoid Qin Fu overshadowing the main theme.
The director does not wish to use a modern perspective to digest this tragedy. Today's prosperity cannot compensate for the blood debt of old days; history is an open wound that never heals.
This Chinese-made film cries out for the forgotten 100-year history of Chinese laborers, and the protagonists fight for their rightful rights. However, the film does not have anyone speak out for the suffering of Native Americans, which also implies that Native Americans are still trapped in their reservations, left to fend for themselves without attention.
