Each year is named after a zodiac animal, and this year is the year of the dragon. This year, Chinese state media reported on the dragon as part of an effort to highlight the difference between the traditional Chinese view of the mythical creature as a symbol of good fortune and the traditional Chinese view of the mythical creature as a symbol of good fortune. We are promoting the use of “ryu”, which is the English version of “ryu”. In the West, it is seen as a harbinger of fiery danger and adventure.
“In Chinese traditional culture, the long symbolizes strength, good luck and extraordinary ability, and embodies the wishes for good weather, peace and happiness,” state news agency Xinhua said on Thursday.
“According to experts, China’s long-themed cultural relics from various eras convey the innovative, inclusive, spirit of unity and hard work of the Chinese nation,” Xinhua News Agency said.
References to dragons can be found all over the world, but there is no obvious indication that they originated in China.
It was previously accepted as a national symbol, but when Mao Zedong’s Communist Party seized power in 1949, the dragon was banished and replaced by the hammer, sickle, and five stars of the national flag.
Under authoritarian leader and fervent nationalist Xi Jinping, the government has sought to assert China’s power in international affairs, including through culture and language. Foreign-language state media now call the islands in the disputed South China Sea, virtually all of which is claimed by the Chinese government, by their Chinese names, mainly using “Xizang,” which was the Mandarin name for the Himalayan region. It has been removed from “Tibet.” It was largely independent before the communists took power.
On China’s internet, where there is slightly more freedom of speech than in highly controlled traditional media, calls for Long’s hiring were mixed. Some supported what they described as a sign of cultural confidence, but given that the usual transliteration of dragon in Mandarin is “long” with just one “o”, it seemed overly nationalistic. Some people criticized it for being linguistically unusual.