Monday, October 23, 2006

Living With Love, Chaos and Haley - New York Times

Living With Love, Chaos and Haley - New York Times

October 22, 2006
Troubled Children

PLYMOUTH, Mass. — When Haley Abaspour started seeing things that were not there — bugs and mice crawling on her parents’ bed, imaginary friends sitting next to her on the couch, dead people at a church that housed her preschool — her parents were unsure what to think. After all, she was a little girl.

“I thought for a long time, ‘She’s just gifted,’ ” said her father, Bejan Abaspour. “ ‘This is good. Don’t worry about it.’ ”

But as Haley got older, things got worse. She developed tics — dolphin squeaks, throat-clearing, clenching her face and body as if moving her bowels. She heard voices, banging, cymbals in her head. She became anxiety-ridden over run-of-the-mill things: ambulance sirens, train rides. Her mood switched suddenly from excitedly chatty to inconsolably distraught.

“It’s like watching ‘The Sound of Music’ and ‘The Exorcist’ all at the same time,” Mr. Abaspour said.

For her family, life with Haley, now 10, has been a turbulent stream of symptoms, diagnoses, medications, unrealized expectations. Diagnosed as a combination of bipolar disorder with psychotic features, obsessive-compulsive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and Tourette’s syndrome, her illness dominates every moment, every relationship, every decision.

Haley’s fears, moods and obsessions seep into her family’s most pedestrian routines — dinnertime, bedtime, getting ready for school. Excruciating worries permeate her parents’ sleep; unanswerable questions end in frustrated hopes.

“The first time we took Haley to the hospital, I guess I expected that they would put it all back together,” said her mother, Christine Abaspour. “But it’s never all back together.”

At least six million American children have difficulties that are diagnosed as serious mental disorders, according to government surveys — a number that has tripled since the early 1990’s. Most are treated with psychiatric medications and therapy. The children sometimes attend special schools.

But while these measures can help, they often do not help enough, and the families of such children are left on their own to sort through a cacophony of conflicting advice.

The illness, and sometimes the treatment, can strain marriages, jobs, finances. Parents must monitor medications, navigate therapy sessions, arrange special school services. Some families must switch neighborhoods or schools to escape unhealthy situations or to find support and services. Some keep friends and relatives away.

Parents can feel guilt, anger, helplessness. Siblings can feel neglected, resentful or pressure to be problem-free themselves.

“It kind of ricochets to other family members,” said Dr. Robert L. Hendren, president-elect of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. “I see so many parents who just hurt badly for their children and then, in a sense, start hurting for themselves.”

Ms. Abaspour, 39, struggles to master the details of Haley’s illness, to answer her obsessive questions, to keep her occupied. Mr. Abaspour, 50, who long believed that “Haley was going to grow out of it,” has been gripped by anxious thoughts and intrusive images that rattle him to tears on the hourlong commute to his job as an anesthesia engineer at a Boston hospital. He imagines people being crushed by trucks, someone hurting Haley, his own death.

Haley’s sister, Megan, 13, has been so focused on Haley and determined not to add to her family’s burden that in June, after a quarrel with her parents, she tied a T-shirt around her neck in a suicidal gesture.

“I feel like she gets all the problems and I feel like I have to take some of that off of her,” Megan said. “It’s really difficult a lot to try to stay away from babying her and helping her. I try to stay still but it just hurts, it hurts inside.”

Haley, with her shy smile and obsidian eyes, is increasingly aware of her own problems, although she cannot always express exactly what is going on inside. “My mind says I need some help” is the way she explained it recently.

Her illness has caused great financial strain; although the Abaspours have health insurance, they have been forced to draw on their savings and lean heavily on their credit cards for living expenses. Still, they have bought a trailer in a New Hampshire campground because there Haley finds occasional solace, and relatives nearby understand the family’s ordeal.

The family wrestles with deciding whom to tell about Haley’s illness, and what to say. Her worst symptoms are most visible at home and less apparent at the public school and the state-financed therapeutic after-school program she attends. Her parents say she works hard to hold herself together during the day and then later, feeling more comfortable with her family, falls apart.

This disparity in behavior is not uncommon, said Dr. Joseph A. Jackson IV, Haley’s psychiatrist, and “parents often get the brunt.”

Because of the contrast in Haley’s public and private behavior, her parents are wary of telling people that she is mentally ill, as they might not notice.

“I don’t want anybody to pity her,” Mr. Abaspour said. But they also get frustrated when teachers or relatives play down the seriousness of Haley’s illness, or conclude that she is being manipulative or that another child-rearing approach would help.

In the middle of last year, for example, a teacher did not understand Haley’s need to leave the classroom to quiet the voices or relieve anxiety. Haley grew so frustrated that she “would sit there in her chair and cry,” her father said. The parents pressed school officials to switch her to another class.

“We’re sick and tired of trying to prove it to people,” Ms. Abaspour said.

Her husband added, “Everybody thinks they have the solution. When Joe Schmo comes over for a drink, he says, ‘Try this, this will work.’ No, it won’t.”

Visions and Voices

From birth, it was clear that “I was dealing with something different,” Ms. Abaspour said. Displaying a photo album with picture after picture of Megan all smiles and Haley “crying, crying, crying,” she added, “We just thought we had a very difficult child.”

Yet exactly what was wrong puzzled them for years, and even now, Ms. Abaspour said, “Every day it’s something new, I swear.”

While increasing awareness of childhood mental illness has helped many children and families, it can also create a misimpression that everything can be treated, said Dr. Glen R. Elliott, chief psychiatrist at the Children’s Health Council, a community mental health service in Palo Alto, Calif., and the author of “Medicating Young Minds: How to Know if Psychiatric Drugs Will Help or Hurt Your Child.” That can make families with complex cases feel “either genuine confusion or pretend certainty,” Dr. Elliott said.

The Abaspours decided to speak with a reporter about Haley’s illness and its impact on their family because they hoped it would help other families and make society more hospitable for children like their daughter. Talking about it was sometimes emotional, especially for Mr. Abaspour, whose eyes often clouded with tears. But they also said they found it useful to articulate their feelings.

When Haley was 3 or 4, a pediatrician blamed tonsillitis-induced sleep apnea, predicting that after her tonsils were removed, “ ‘you’ll see a totally different child,’ ” Ms. Abaspour recalled.

“We thought, ‘This is what is wrong with our child. This is our answer,’ ” she said. Preschool teachers suggested a learning disability. Later, Haley repeated first grade. The Abaspours consulted therapists about the visions of friends in the liner of the family’s pool and riding with Haley on her bike, and the voices criticizing her or telling her to touch a certain table. When a neurologist ruled out medical causes like Lyme disease, Ms. Abaspour recalled, her husband said, “I think we should just give her a placebo — it’s all in her head.”

They got a cat, “though we weren’t cat people,” Ms. Abaspour said. Then they got another because the first was “not the type of cat that Haley could throw over her shoulder and squeeze.”

New symptoms kept emerging. For a while, when she was about 7, the voices “were telling her she was a boy,” Ms. Abaspour said. “She had to constantly prove to them that she wasn’t.”

Haley became obsessed with penises, which she called “bums.” She claimed to see them though she was looking at fully clothed men and boys, her mother said. “Then she felt guilty. She would come up to me and whisper, ‘I saw his bum, I saw his bum.’ The bus driver or the little boy, anyone. It was constant.”

To halt the whispering, Ms. Abaspour suggested that they share a private signal: Haley could flash a thumbs-up after a sighting. Haley also seemed preoccupied with death, and on a highway would say that voices told her, “If that license plate didn’t say such and such, she was going to die,” her mother said.

Once, Mr. Abaspour recalled, Haley “kept yelling that she wants to start over.”

The Treatment Puzzle

When she was almost 8, Haley visited Dr. Jackson at his office at the Cambridge Health Alliance. He was struck by the results of a screening: Haley met full criteria for virtually every mental disorder listed.

“Her symptoms,” he said, “suggested anxiety, morbid thoughts, obsessions possibly of a sexual nature, frequent fluctuations in mood, periods of euphoria, giddiness, irritability, rapid speech, auditory and visual hallucinations, thought disorganization, vocal tics, distractibility, poor socialization in school, sensory integration issues, attention impulse disorder, manic behavior, sleep disturbance.”

Dr. Jackson wondered if the voices and the friends, which Haley told him were “nowhere but everywhere,” were schizophrenic-like hallucinations or milder thought distortions.

He also saw Haley’s mood swing from anxiety about a “disturbing dream in which her mother was killed” to euphoria, as she gleefully drew a large, brightly colored butterfly and a self-portrait with a too-big smile and a skirt that ballooned as if she were floating. The pictures, he said, “scream” manic sensibility, suggesting bipolar disorder.

Dr. Jackson prescribed an antipsychotic, Risperdal, one of a dozen drugs Haley would try. Some helped initially, but the voices returned or side effects developed.

Huge pills or bad-tasting liquid made Haley gag or throw fits.

“It was horrible, horrible, horrible,” her mother said, “and she’d pull us into it because we had to make her take it.”

Lithium caused weight gain: clothes that fit her one day no longer did the next.

When Haley was 81/2, Mr. Abaspour said, “Let’s drop all of these medications and see what happens.” He said, “I wanted to see her true self.”

The results chastened them. “You see her fine one day,” Mr. Abaspour said. “The second day comes and she’s fine and you say, ‘You see, honey, there’s nothing wrong with her.’ Then it’s the third day and she goes crazy and you feel like an idiot.”

Haley resumed taking Risperdal. Then, abruptly, her condition worsened.

“She couldn’t function, she couldn’t go to school,” said Ms. Abaspour, who took Haley to a hospital; she had to handle the crisis with her husband away in London.

In the emergency room, Haley was manic and hyperarticulate, Ms. Abaspour recalled. “I was a basket case.”

When Mr. Abaspour returned and saw Haley “like a zombie” in a hospital full of out-of-control children, his first reaction was, “She can’t be in here.”

But the eight-day hospital stay made him grasp the severity of her illness.

“You look at an X-ray and you say it’s a fracture,” he said. “But this thing. ... Before then, there wasn’t solid evidence.”

A year later, school halls “would get scary because the voices would get louder,” so Haley constantly visited the school’s nurse and psychologist, her mother said. “She was going out of her mind.”

Haley was hospitalized again, and another antipsychotic drug, Abilify, muffled the voices.

“I remember thinking, ‘Am I supposed to be happy about this?,’ ” Ms. Abaspour said. She was grateful that something helped but distressed at the suggestion that Haley was psychotic. The Abilify has not soothed Haley’s anxiety or stopped her outbursts. And despite increases in the dosage, back are the voices (four boys and a girl), the tics (eye squinting and hand clenching) and the “bums.”

Dr. Jackson, her psychiatrist, said Haley’s biggest asset was her “very caring family” that was “seeking ways to shore themselves up” to better help her.

Ms. Abaspour said: “We ask ourselves sometimes, ‘Why? Why did it happen to us?’ Other times we see a child bald, going through chemotherapy. That’s the thing about this — it’s on the inside, you can’t see it.”

Megan’s Heartache

I pretend no one is around me when my sister is there.

I feel a constant hurt inside.

I touch a rainbow of joyfulness in my mind when my sister and I are FINALLY having a fun laugh together.

I worry that when one day I die, I won’t be there to help my sister.

I cry to the stars, pleading them to take me away from this madness at mind.

Megan’s sixth-grade writing assignment was to write a poem called “I Am.”

Virtually every line was about Haley.

Megan wrote of love, frustration, obligation, pain, embarrassment. Eighteen months later, those feelings erupted.

Told to do dishes before calling a friend, Megan felt that the chore should be Haley’s and stormed to her room. When her father said it was Megan’s responsibility, “I really got mad and slammed the door,” she recalled. “He came and ripped my phone right out of the wall.”

That was unusual for Mr. Abaspour, usually gentle or quietly humorous.

“I tried not to say something that would hurt her,” he said. “And definitely not to touch her. So I took it out on the phone.”

Megan said her reaction was, “Why should I live?”

“I took a T-shirt and I put it around my neck,” she said. “Then I said, ‘No I shouldn’t do this. I want to live but I don’t know another way out.’ ”

Siblings of mentally ill children often have such feelings, experts said.

Ten days of treatment helped Megan understand that “I felt pretty much like I was another mom for Haley,” she said.

The Abaspours, who always gave Megan positive attention, were stunned. But Ms. Abaspour said she might have unconsciously been relieved that Megan could get Haley to laugh, or in other ways “take a little attention off me.”

For Megan, a doctor prescribed Prozac, but she became edgy and the suicidal thoughts continued.

“When I’m doing dishes and I see a knife there, my mind’s like, ‘Pick up the knife and kill yourself,’ ” Megan said. “I kind of just think, ‘Would things be easier without me?’ ”

Now she has stopped taking medication and is seeing a psychiatrist. Her parents are encouraging her to focus more on herself. She realizes, she said, “I’m important.”

Still, trying not to help Haley is hard. “I don’t really feel the pain that she feels,” Megan said, “but I feel that I should to make it even between us.”

Haley’s mother calls it “the ongoing search” — Haley’s obsessive quest for novelty and for objects to hold or to stroke over her touch-sensitive skin.

“I need something to calm me down so I can learn how to end my frustration,” Haley said. “I just get, like, sometimes, mad. I need to, like, hold it or hug it or just play with it.”

She and her family search through stores, scavenge through her crawlspace storage area and her bedroom full of Beanie Babies, toy cars, dolls. Megan said she sometimes offered her own belongings for Haley, thinking, “if I get excited about it she’ll decide it’s the right thing.”

But, Ms. Abaspour said, “she’s never satisfied.” Because her parents sometimes brush the hair on her arm with a surgical brush from Mr. Abaspour’s hospital, the family’s therapist recently suggested getting a soft lambskin.

Haley fixated on buying one, always asking as if it were a new thought: “Oh my God, you know what just came to mind? If I get that animal fur...”

Megan found her a faux shearling vest to stroke instead, but Haley exploded.

“I wanted Megan to find something like that animal fur,” she wailed, convulsing and weeping.

Anguished as he watched her, Mr. Abaspour said: “This is the point of no return. She’ll scream and cry and kick. If the neighbors could hear, they would think we were abusing the kid.”

Haley refuses to be consoled or touched, all the while saying, “Please help me, please make it stop, please make it go away,” her mother said. The Abaspours look on helplessly or send her to another room.

Haley’s eruptions, often 20 minutes long, occur almost daily, especially in the evenings. They often begin with Haley revved up.

Before the lambskin incident, for example, she marched around, chatting giddily about camp: “Today, today, today, we, um, instead of two periods of the game thingies, they call it sessions, periods, each session or whatever, we went to the picnic tables and we all went to the picnic tables and it was really fun.”

Haley’s parents struggled to track her unspooling sentences and scrambled thoughts.

“Did you follow the bouncing ball?” Ms. Abaspour asked her husband, who replied, “I don’t even see the ball, honey.”

Haley sighs, frowns and fidgets, eyes drooping before she falls apart. Sometimes she hyperventilates or crawls under a table. It always ends with crying, but sometimes she will start to laugh through her tears, becoming “all chipper again, like manic,” Mr. Abaspour said.

Adds Ms. Abaspour: Later, “she says, ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry,’ apologizing for who she is.” Her father said: “It’s not like a hurt that you can kiss better. It comes from within, and she doesn’t know why, and you can’t do anything about it.”

A Mother’s Stoicism

Christine Abaspour, the youngest of four girls raised by a divorced mother, knew what she wanted early in life. At 19, she left Massachusetts, joined a sister in Florida and became a waitress. At 25, she met her husband-to-be, who was 11 years older. She was engaged in two weeks, married in nine months and a mother a year later.

“We both wanted to have children right away, like you wouldn’t believe,” she recalled.

Ms. Abaspour said that she had no regrets, and that Haley “was given to us for some reason, and I keep waiting for the day when I realize why.”

Still, the experience has tested her stamina, and she avoids capitulating to Haley’s whims and outbursts by imposing structure, consistency, even distance.

“I’m her mother,” Ms. Abaspour said. “I try to make it a better world for her, a more comfortable world. I stay very strong for her and very encouraging for her. If she comes out of a meltdown, I’ll say, ‘I knew that you could.’ I don’t make her feel totally hopeless. It doesn’t give me any satisfaction, though, because I still feel helpless. Unfortunately it just bites you in the face all day long.”

Ms. Abaspour’s stoic approach, which her husband appreciates but cannot always emulate, is “a good coping skill for parents,” Dr. Elliott, of the Children’s Health Council, said. “It’s what happens to a family system when you’ve got a source of chaos in the middle of it.”

After getting Haley ready for school, Ms. Abaspour feels she has already lived an entire day. In the afternoon, “Haley walks in the door and I just want to hold her and give her a big kiss like most kids,” Ms. Abaspour said. “Instead I get a frown and tears and ‘Ooh, I had such a stressful day.’ ”

She said that every evening, a distraught Haley will “say to me her same 12 questions: ‘What’s going to happen when I need to go to school and I can’t leave the classroom?’ or ‘What do I have to look forward to today?’ ”

By bedtime, Ms. Abaspour said, “your heart’s just breaking.”

To slake Haley’s thirst for “something to do,” Ms. Abaspour keeps her involved in activities outside of school. Otherwise, the family ends up stopping for ice cream or concocting other outings, because unstructured time allows Haley to focus on the voices and anxiety. “Staying home is not an option,” Ms. Abaspour said. “Honestly I could not keep her busy. Sometimes being around here on a Saturday or Sunday, it’s almost toxic. She has multiple episodes — it’s like living hell.”

Haley’s fears of noises, crowded streets and surprises force the Abaspours to forgo amusement parks, apple picking or other traditional family activities. When relatives visit “and you think it’s going to be relaxing and we’ll watch movies and eat popcorn — that doesn’t happen in this family,” Ms. Abaspour said.

Instead, there are mood cycles, as when Haley marched around announcing, “I’m going to make a really great art project,” then fell apart, wailing, “I don’t know what to do.”

Ms. Abaspour stays unflustered. When Haley bawled, “I don’t have any markers,” her mother replied, “Oh, don’t tell me you don’t have.”

But she found Haley a T-shirt to cut up and draw on, saying, “If I can get her to do that kind of chop, chop, chop, mark, mark, mark, it kind of brings her back.”

Ms. Abaspour said she had watched “everyone else in the family rush over to her, and I won’t become a part of that. I make her be responsible for her own feelings because I can’t be responsible for those. You still have to be a regular parent. Honestly, she has to learn to soothe herself.”

But Ms. Abaspour doggedly monitors Haley’s progress. This summer, she visited Haley at day camp and was dismayed that the child frequently declined to participate, asking for the nurse.

Sitting out the swim period one day, Haley, wearing a “Keep It Cool” T-shirt, listed her feelings on a worksheet: “stressed, axxouis, sick, shacky.”

At lunch, she mostly licked salt off pretzels. Asked to choose a word-card matching her emotions, she picked “overwhelmed.”

Ms. Abaspour worries that as Haley becomes a teenager, her poor social skills might get her “mixed up with the wrong kids” or lead her to use illegal drugs. So she arranges play dates, but if friends are unavailable “it’s the end of the world,” she said. If they are available, she said, Haley anxiously asks, “What do I say, Mommy?”

Ms. Abaspour was recently laid off from a medical assistant’s job. Her former co-workers understood her need to interrupt work to deal with Haley’s needs, she said, and “didn’t look at me and say, ‘Her child’s crazy.’ ” Now she fears she will not find an employer who is as tolerant, though the family needs the income. Haley’s illness, the Abaspours were dismayed to discover, does not qualify for disability assistance.

In August, Ms. Abaspour arranged an elaborate 50th-birthday surprise party for her husband. They were “not always on the same page” about Haley at first, she said, but their strong marriage helps her handle the strain.

So do bright spots, she said, like the day Haley “really kissed me.”

Still, she can get overwhelmed.

Sometimes she bolts awake at night, but she declines medication.

“I can’t climb in a shell and stay there forever,” she said, “although it seems like some days where I’d want to be.”

A Father’s Anxiety

As a young man, Bejan Abaspour worried, especially about family.

Twenty years ago, for example, when his sister’s son was born, “I pictured my nephew getting Super Glue in his eyes and I was calling my sister saying, ‘Make sure you keep Super Glue away from him.’ ”

But the worries were not that intense — until Haley’s illness. After that, the intrusive thoughts and images got worse, horrific scenes in which he imagines himself as bystander or thwarted rescuer. “I’ll be driving next to a semi tractor-trailer truck and all of a sudden I will picture someone getting crushed by the wheel,” he said. “It’s usually an older lady or a kid. You get them out from under the truck, but it doesn’t stop. I’m in the emergency room, trying to help. I’m at the funeral. Then very easily, the tears come.”

Mr. Abaspour said he sometimes pictured Haley “getting lost somewhere, or someone’s going to hurt her. I’m involved and trying to get the guy who did it to stop. Sometimes I kill him. Sometimes it doesn’t get that far.”

Other times, he said, he imagines his death, seeing his family “at the funeral home and I’m laying there. I try to see what’s going on at home, how Meggie’s reacting to my death, how Haley’s reacting, what Christine is going through.”

He rehashes things Haley has said, like wanting to “start over” or her question: “When I get really old, can I come back home? Will you be there?”

He wonders if his worrying laid genetic groundwork for Haley’s illness, “if I’m the cause of what Haley’s going through.”

Until recently, Mr. Abaspour, who also has trouble sleeping, told no one about his agonizing thoughts, not even his wife.

“I didn’t want to burden her,” he said. “I can handle it. So what if I’m driving to work and I cry? So what if I only sleep for four hours?”

But last spring, the family’s therapist noticed “I had certain problems,” he recalled. She encouraged him to tell his wife whenever he had disturbing thoughts. Mr. Abaspour said he hoped that confronting his own anxiety would help “get to the bottom of what Haley’s going through.”

He added, “It doesn’t matter for me, but for Haley.”

Families once kept illnesses like Haley’s quiet, afraid of being shunned or disparaged.

Public acceptance has grown, but some misperceptions and prejudice remain, and families feel conflicted: they want people to understand so the child can get appropriate help, but they also fear that Haley will be mocked or ostracized.

“If they keep it a secret then they’re bad parents,” Dr. Elliott said. “If they start spewing diagnoses, they’re subject to criticism because they’re not taking responsibility, just laying it on the illness. Or they’re social pariahs because there are some people who think that mental illness is contagious.”

Like other families, the Abaspours sometimes hesitate to publicly label their daughter mentally ill. But they also want people to know, and they get frustrated if people do not fully accept or understand it, or see her symptoms “as a manipulative thing, or they feel like they can fix it themselves, maybe by distracting her,” Ms. Abaspour said.

Her own family now understands and is very supportive, but it took some convincing, she said.

“My mother would say, ‘She’ll be fine, she’ll be fine, there’s nothing wrong with her,’ ” Ms. Abaspour said. “My sister says, ‘Well, she didn’t act like that when she was over here.’ ”

Mr. Abaspour has not told most of his family, who live in England, because they might worry excessively or not understand.

He told his sister, but “she was like I was when I first encountered the situation — disbelief or denial,” he said. His sister, he said, has not told her husband or her 20-year-old son, which created an odd atmosphere when they visited the Abaspours in August. “When Haley did have one of her little episodes, they were all like, ‘oh, oh,’ and they wondered why we weren’t running over to her,” Ms. Abaspour said. “I would like to talk to them more about it. If she had diabetes, they’d know she had diabetes.”

When, after reading a book for children with bipolar disorder, Haley said, “I can’t wait to go to school and tell everybody I’m bipolar,” the Abaspours were torn.

They discouraged her from announcing the diagnosis. But Haley did tell her classmates, “ ‘I have a lot of noise going on in my head and sometimes I feel anxious and sometimes I have to take a walk.’ ”

Some day, the Abaspours hope, Haley will have more effective drugs and better coping skills, and society will be more tolerant, so she can lead an independent life. But they have no illusions.

“This is not going away,” Ms. Abaspour said. Not for Haley or her family. “The overflow of what Haley has is what has made all of us what we are today.”


[+/-] show/hide this post

Thursday, October 19, 2006

Preschool Puberty, and a Search for the Causes - New York Times

Preschool Puberty, and a Search for the Causes - New York Times

October 17, 2006

Parents often think their children grow up too quickly, but few are prepared for the problem that Dr. Michael Dedekian and his colleagues at the University of Massachusetts Medical School reported recently.

At the annual Pediatric Academic Society meeting in May in San Francisco, they presented a report that described how a preschool-age girl, and then her kindergarten-age brother, mysteriously began growing pubic hair. These cases were not isolated; in 2004, pediatric endocrinologists from San Diego reported a similar cluster of five children.

It turns out that there have been clusters of cases in which children have prematurely developed signs of puberty, outbreaks similar to epidemics of influenza or environmental poisonings. In 1979, the medical journal The Lancet described an outbreak of breast enlargement among hundreds of Italian schoolchildren, probably caused by estrogen contamination of beef and poultry. Similar epidemics in Puerto Rico and Haiti were tracked by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the 1980’s.

Increasingly — though the science is still far from definitive and the precise number of such cases is highly speculative — some physicians worry that children are at higher risk of early puberty as a result of the increasing prevalence of certain drugs, cosmetics and environmental contaminants, called “endocrine disruptors,” that can cause breast growth, pubic hair development and other symptoms of puberty.

Most commonly, outbreaks of puberty in children are traced to accidental drug exposures from products that are used incorrectly.

Dr. Dedekian’s first patient was evaluated for possible genetic endocrine problems and a rare brain tumor before the cause of her puberty was discovered. It turned out that her testosterone level was almost 100 times normal, in the range of an adult man. The same problem affected her brother.

The doctors realized that the girl’s father was using a concentrated testosterone skin cream bought from an Internet compounding pharmacy for cosmetic and sexual performance purposes. From normal skin contact with their father, the children absorbed the testosterone, which caused pubic hair growth and genital enlargement. The boy, in particular, also developed some aggressive behavior problems.

Sex hormones are potent because they are easily absorbed through the skin and resist degradation better than many other hormones. Unlike protein-based hormones like insulin, sex hormones like testosterone and estrogen are technically steroids, meaning they are derived from cholesterol.

Primarily made by the liver, cholesterol begins with tiny pieces of sugar that are joined, twisted and oxidized in a dizzying series to make an end product that resembles the interlinked rings of the Olympic emblem. Dr. Joseph L. Goldstein, Nobel Laureate and a biochemist in Texas, once called it “the most highly decorated small molecule in biology,” because 13 Nobel Prizes have been awarded for its study.

Through further processing, primarily in the gonads and adrenal glands, cholesterol is converted into sex hormones like estrogen and testosterone. Kenneth Lee Jones, the former chief of pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego, noted pediatric cases similar to those described by Dr. Dedekian in a 2004 report in the journal Pediatrics.

At that time, unregulated “prohormones” like Andro, famously used by Mark McGwire, the former St. Louis Cardinals power hitter, and banned by federal law in 2005, were available as topical sprays used to enhance libido. Dr. Jones said the sprays used by adults in some households permeated the children’s bedsheets, and the early puberty stopped only when the adults stopped using the sprays and also discarded old sheets.

Testosterone-containing products are not the only trigger of disordered puberty in children.

In a 1998 paper in the journal Clinical Pediatrics, Dr. Chandra Tiwary, the former chief of pediatric endocrinology at Brook Army Medical Center in Texas, reported an outbreak of early breast development in four young African-American girls who used shampoos that contained estrogen and placental extract. The early puberty reversed once the shampoo was stopped.

In the tradition of previous physicians who deliberately exposed themselves to possible pathogens, Dr. Tiwary tried the shampoos on himself. He carefully measured his own levels of various male and female sex hormones to establish his baseline, used the shampoos for a few days, then repeated the tests.

While Dr. Tiwary is quick to admit that his unpublished findings must be interpreted with great caution, some of his sex hormone levels changed by almost 40 percent after he used the shampoos. In some cases, substances other than sex steroids may also disrupt normal sexual development. In Boston at the annual Endocrine Society meeting in June, Clifford Bloch of the University of Colorado School of Medicine presented several cases of young men who had developed marked breast enlargement from using shampoos containing lavender and tea tree oils, which are widely used essential oil additives that present no problem for adults. (Unlike Dr. Dedekian’s cases, these cases were not a result of passive transfer from parents. The boys themselves used the shampoos.)

Dr. Bloch collaborated with scientists at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in North Carolina to test the oils on human breast cells grown in test tubes. Lavender and tea tree oil had the same effect on the cells as estrogen.

Dr. Bloch speculates that the findings, which he is submitting for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, may explain the boys’ breast growth. He noted, however, that cells in a test tube are a far cry from humans, so the relationship of the essential oil to breast growth remains hypothetical.

While pediatric endocrinologists have implicated pharmaceutical or personal care products for causing pubertal problems in children, some environmental scientists also claim that some widespread industrial and pharmaceutical pollutants harm the normal sexual development of fish and animals. By extension, they may also contribute to earlier or disrupted puberty in children, these scientists contend. Robert Havelock, a senior reproductive toxicologist at the Environmental Protection Agency, said these concerns “caused a shift in worry from cancer to noncancer” effects of environmental pollution over the past decade.

In 1994, scientists found that estrogen-like chemicals from plastics manufacturing plants that had contaminated sewers in England caused genetically male fish to develop into females. In the early 1980’s, major spills of the DDT-like pesticide dicofol in Florida led to the “feminization” of the reproductive tracts of male alligators.

Robert Cooper, the chief of endocrinology at the reproductive toxicology division of the Environmental Protection Agency, says various sources of endocrine disruptors, like manufacturing chemicals, may be leaching into the environment. While their relation to pubertal problems in children remains highly speculative, he believes further study is needed.

Past epidemiological evidence, however, does worry Dr. Cooper, because some chemical exposures have been associated with early puberty. In 1973, thousands of Michigan residents ate food contaminated by a flame retardant, PBB, which was later correlated with earlier menstruation in girls. In Puerto Rico, which has some of the world’s highest rates of early puberty, the condition was linked to higher levels of a plasticizer called phthalate in affected children.

Governmental efforts to create a systematic method to assess possible endocrine disruptors from environmental sources have stalled.

In 1996, Congress directed the E.P.A. to develop a comprehensive screening program for possible endocrine disruptors within three years. Dr. Cooper says no such program has begun operation, a failure he attributed largely to stonewalling by chemical industry representatives who serve on an advisory committee for the program. Now the proposed rollout is December 2007, but Dr. Cooper said, “They may be dreaming.” Critics cite the program’s high potential costs and lack of reliable laboratory tests.

Protecting children from endocrine disrupters in cosmetics and prescription drugs may also be difficult in the near future.

In 1989, the Food and Drug Administration proposed allowing up to 10,000 units of estrogen per ounce of cosmetic, the approximate oral daily dose of hormone replacement therapy for postmenopausal women. Dr. Tiwary said that in the early 1990’s he filed an adverse drug report with the agency about hormone-containing shampoos but that to his knowledge, it never came to anything.

Reached by e-mail, a spokeswoman for the F.D.A. said that the agency was “aware of some reports describing premature sexual devolepment” with shampoos but that it had concluded that “there is no reason for consumers to be concerned.”

At this time, “placental materials are neither prohibited by cosmetic regulations nor restricted” by the F.D.A., she wrote.

Dr. Dedekian said that while prohormones like Andro are no longer commercially available, lax regulation of so-called compounding pharmacies allows the manufacture and sale of concentrated testosterone creams, like the one affecting his patient, without government oversight.

Topical lotions and creams containing testosterone may become more common. In 2000, Solvay Pharmaceuticals secured F.D.A. approval for Androgel, a lotion to treat a syndrome the company calls low T, referring to low testosterone. According to the company’s Web site, the condition affects 13 million men over 45. From 2000 to 2004, the number of testosterone prescriptions doubled to over 2.4 million a year.

Solvay Pharmaceuticals referred questions on Androgel’s possible risks to Natan Bar-Chama, an associate professor of urology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine.

Dr. Bar-Chama acknowledged the theoretical risks of transfer of the hormone through skin contact with children, but he said he had never seen a case among the hundreds of men he has treated. He added, however, that it was prudent to take precautions when using the product, including hand-washing after handling the gel and wearing clothing to avoid skin-to-skin contact with others.

In 2003, an Institute of Medicine report stated, “There has been increasing concern about the increase in the number of men using testosterone and the lack of scientific data on the benefits and risks of this therapy.”

Dr. Dan Blazer, a psychiatrist at Duke who was chairman of the committee, said, “In no way did we find a condition that we defined as low T.”

The major clinical trial of Androgel’s effectiveness for low T, published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism in 2000, included neither a placebo group (patients who received an inactive dummy lotion) nor a control group (patients who did not have low T) for comparison.

Dr. Ronald Swerdloff, the chief of endocrinology at Harbor-U.C.L.A. Medical Center in Torrance, Calif., and a consultant for Solvay, who ran the study, said the trial was limited in scope since it examined “a new route of administration for an already established drug.”

Darshak M. Sanghavi is a pediatric cardiologist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.


[+/-] show/hide this post

Preschoolers Grow Older as Parents Seek an Edge - New York Times

Preschoolers Grow Older as Parents Seek an Edge - New York Times

October 19, 2006

Preschoolers Grow Older as Parents Seek an Edge

Jack Haims, who turned 6 in late September, started kindergarten this year with an enviable skill set under his tiny belt: He could already read simple rhyming books, count to 100 and write his name.

“He has a lot more self-confidence if he tends to be the older one,” said his mother, Charlotte, 37. “I wanted him to have an easier time.”

Jack acquired his confidence and abilities thanks to an extra year of preschool, or perhaps simply an extra year of life. He is not alone: From Bronxville, where he lives, to Manhattan and beyond, parents are strategizing more than ever to keep their children out of kindergarten until they are nearly, or already, 6 years old.

Children who turn 5 even in June or earlier are sometimes considered not ready for kindergarten these days, as parents harbor an almost Darwinian desire to ensure that their own child is not the runt of the class. Although a spate of literature in the last few years about boys’ academic difficulties helped prompt some parents to hold their sons back a year, girls, too, are being held back. Yet research on whether the extra year helps is inconclusive.

Fueled by the increasingly rigorous nature of kindergarten and a generation of parents intent on giving their children every edge, the practice is flourishing in New York City private schools and suburban public schools. A crop of 5-year-olds in nursery school and kindergartners pushing 7 are among the most striking results.

“These summer boys have now evolved to including girls and going back as far as March,” said Dana Haddad, admissions director at the Claremont Preparatory School, in Lower Manhattan, referring to children who turned 5 in those months but stayed in nursery school. “It’s become a huge epidemic.” In some corners, the decision of when to enroll a child in kindergarten has mushroomed from a non-issue into an agonizing choice, as anxiety-generating as, well, the private school kindergarten admissions process itself.

“It’s kind of crazy to hold them back,” said Jessica Siegel, 40, whose daughter, Mirit Skeen is back for another year at Montclair Community Pre-K in New Jersey, although she turned 5 in late August and the public school cutoff there for kindergarten is Oct. 1. “Someone’s going to be the youngest. Someone’s going to be the smallest.”

Ms. Siegel and her husband considered the decision for months, waiting until the week before public school started before making it final in case Mirit “suddenly had some kind of huge emotional shift.”

“I felt like her whole experience is about being the smallest and the youngest, and I wanted to change that experience for her,” Ms. Siegel said, adding, “The more people do it, the more people do it — partially because you don’t want yours to be the last.”

To stave off preschool fatigue, some city parents send their children to public school kindergarten for a year, hoping to transfer them to a private kindergarten the next year. Columbus Park West Nursery School on the Upper West Side is considering opening a “junior kindergarten” to accommodate children who in the past would simply have headed for the real thing.

In the New York City private school world, demographics play a role. Because so many children have applied for kindergarten slots in recent years, schools can be picky. While most city private schools maintain an official policy that kindergartners must turn 5 by Sept. 1, many routinely ask children born in August, July, and in some cases June to wait a year. Nursery school directors, mindful of the trend, may also encourage immature 5-year-olds to wait.

“Nobody ever was successful because they were the youngest in the class,” said Betsy Newell, director of the Park Avenue Christian Church Day School.

“The gift of a year, that’s what I always say to parents,” Mrs. Newell added. “The gift of a year is the best gift you can give a child.”

But research on the practice is inconclusive. In May, a federal Department of Education study found that of 21,000 children who entered kindergarten in the fall of 1998, results for the 6 percent who started late were mixed. By the end of first grade, the study found, the late starters were slightly more proficient than their classmates at reading, but less proficient in math.

Still, many parents are convinced that the year makes a difference.

Unlike many suburban districts, the New York City public schools are generally strict in placing children who turn 5 by Dec. 31 in kindergarten that year, and not the following year. Kindergarten is not mandatory, but children who are old enough for first grade will be placed in first grade. That rigidity has angered some parents, who maintain that in this day and age, kindergarten is no place for a 4-year-old.

City public school officials defended their cutoff system, saying it was best for children.

“New York City is so out of sync,” fumed Marlene Barron, head of the West Side Montessori School on the Upper West Side and confidante of many a parent frustrated by the public school policy. “It’s ridiculous. They have the babies of the universe. When you have kids who are so young, of course they never can test as well as kids who are older.”

Wendy Levey, director of the Epiphany Community Nursery School on the Upper East Side, said the benefits of being older were evident in settings like bar mitzvah parties and middle school dances, when “the really young kids are running around throwing ice cubes.”

And Simone Hristidis, admissions director at Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School, says her school’s college counselor insists she can sometimes detect age differences in college applications.

“What’s the downside?” Ms. Hristidis asked. “I’m waiting for somebody to tell me the downside. That you get out of college a little later?”

Several years ago, Ms. Hristidis revised the school’s official policy, pushing the kindergarten cutoff back a month, to Aug. 1.

“I didn’t want to waste parents’ time, and I didn’t think it was an honest statement,” she said. “We were starting to hold a lot of June and July, and I hadn’t had any August in a while.”

On the first day at Epiphany this year, Josh Miller, who turned 5 in early July, confidently shook Ms. Levey’s hand and looked her straight in the eye, a development that his mother, Eileen, said affirmed her decision to keep him in nursery school.

“Last year he didn’t look her in the eye,” Mrs. Miller, 38, said. “He didn’t know he was supposed to shake her hand. He’s a completely different kid.”


[+/-] show/hide this post

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Shing-Tung Yau: The Emperor of Math - Dennis Overbye - New York Times

Shing-Tung Yau: The Emperor of Math - Dennis Overbye - New York Times: "ctober 17, 2006"

October 17, 2006
Scientist at Work: Shing-Tung Yau

The Emperor of Math

In 1979, Shing-Tung Yau, then a mathematician at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, was visiting China and asked the authorities for permission to visit his birthplace, Shantou, a mountain town in Guangdong Province.

At first they refused, saying the town was not on the map. Finally, after more delays and excuses, Dr. Yau found himself being driven on a fresh dirt road through farm fields to his hometown, where the citizens slaughtered a cow to celebrate his homecoming. Only long after he left did Dr. Yau learn that the road had been built for his visit.

“I was truly amazed,” Dr. Yau said recently, smiling sheepishly. “I feel guilty that this happened.” He was standing in the airy frosted-glass light of his office in the Morningside Center of Mathematics, one of three math institutes he has founded in China.

For nine months of the year, Dr. Yau is a Harvard math professor, best known for inventing the mathematical structures known as Calabi-Yau spaces that underlie string theory, the supposed “theory of everything.” In 1982 he won a Fields Medal, the mathematics equivalent of a Nobel Prize. Dr. Yau can be found holding court in the Yenching restaurant in Harvard Square or off the math library in his cramped office, where the blackboard is covered with equations and sketches of artfully chopped-up doughnuts.

But the other three months he is what his friend Andrew Strominger, a Harvard physicist, called “the emperor ascendant of Chinese science,” one of the most prominent of the “overseas Chinese” who return home every summer to work, teach, lobby, inspire and feud like warlords in an effort to advance world-class science in China.

David J. Gross, the Nobel physicist and string theorist who directs the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara, called Dr. Yau “a transitional figure, between emperor and democrat.”

Dr. Yau’s story is a window into the dynamics that prevail in China as 5,000 years of Middle Kingdom tradition tries to mix with postmodern science, a blending that, if it takes, could eventually reshape the balance of science and technology in the world.

“In China he is a movie star,” said Ronnie Chan, a Hong Kong real estate developer and an old friend who helped bankroll the Morningside Center. And last summer Dr. Yau played the part, dashing in black cars from television studios to V.I.P. receptions in forbidden gardens in the Forbidden City. He ushered Stephen Hawking into the Great Hall of the People in Tiananmen Square to kick off a meeting of some of the world’s leading physicists on string theory, and beamed as a poem he had written was performed by a music professor on the conference stage. It reads in part: “Beautiful indeed/is the source of truth./To measure the changes of time and space/the smartest are nothing.”

Dr. Yau does not buy the emperor bit. Where, he protested recently, is his empire if he holds no political position and two of his most brilliant recent students are currently without jobs? “It’s just a perception as far as I can tell,” he said.

Certainly, his life is not all roses. In the last year alone Dr. Yau has been engaged in a very public fight with Beijing University, having accused it of corruption, and a New Yorker magazine article portrayed him as trying to horn in on credit for solving the Poincaré conjecture, a famous 100-year-old problem about the structure of space.

Everybody agrees that Dr. Yau is one of the great mathematicians of the age.

“Yau really is a genius,” said Robert Greene, a mathematician at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The quantity and quality of the math he has done is overpowering.”

But even his admirers say he has a political side. “As Shiing-Shen Chern’s successor as emperor of Chinese mathematics,” Deane Yang, a professor of mathematics at Polytechnic University in Brooklyn and an old family friend, wrote in a letter to The New Yorker, “Yau has an outsized ego and great ambition, and has done things that dismay his peers.” But, Dr. Yang said, Dr. Yau has been a major force for good in mathematics and in China, a prodigious teacher who has trained 39 Ph.D.’s.

Richard Hamilton, a friend of Dr. Yau and a mathematician at Columbia, said Dr. Yau had built “an assembly of talent, not an empire of people, people attracted by his energy, his brilliant ideas and his unflagging support for first-rate mathematics, people whom Yau has brought together to work on the hardest problems.”

A Barefoot Boy

That Shing-Tung Yau, born in 1949, had such potential was not always obvious. His family fled the mainland and the Communist takeover when he was a baby. As one of eight children of a college professor and a librarian, growing up poor without electricity or running water in a village outside Hong Kong, he was the leader of a street gang and often skipped school. But talks with his father instilled in him a love of literature and philosophy and, he learned when he started studying math, a taste for abstract thinking.

“In fact, I felt I can understand my father’s conversations better after I learned geometry,” he said at a talk in 2003.

When he was 14, his father died, leaving the family destitute and in debt. To assuage his pain, the young Mr. Yau retreated into his studies. To help out financially, he worked as a tutor.

At the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Mr. Yau emerged as a precocious mathematician, leaving after only three years, with no degree, for graduate school at the University of California, Berkeley.

Mr. Yau took six courses his first semester there, leaving scant time for lunch. By the end of his first year he had collaborated with a teacher to prove conjectures about the geometry of unusually warped spaces. He also came under the wing of Dr. Chern, then widely recognized as the greatest living Chinese-born mathematician, who told Mr. Yau he had already done enough work to write a doctoral thesis.

Dr. Yau was in Berkeley during the wildest years of the antiwar movement. He did not participate, but he was already political. He and his friends demonstrated at the Taiwan Consulate General in San Francisco to protest Japanese incursions on Chinese territory. “Maybe we envied our American colleagues and took after them,” Dr. Yau said.

In 1971, at age 22, Dr. Yau took his new Ph.D. to the Institute for Advanced Study, then to the State University of New York at Stony Brook and Stanford, where he arrived in 1973 in time for a conference on geometry and general relativity — Einstein’s theory that ascribes gravity to warped space-time geometry. At the conference, Dr. Yau had a brainstorm, realizing he could disprove a longstanding conjecture by the University of Pennsylvania professor Eugenio Calabi that the dimensions of space could be curled up like the loops in a carpet.

Dr. Yau set to work on a paper. But two months later he got a letter from Dr. Calabi and realized there was a gap in his reasoning. “I couldn’t sleep,” Dr. Yau recalled.

After agonizing for two weeks, he concluded that the opposite was true: the Calabi conjecture was right. His proof of that, published in 1976, made him a star.

His paper would also lay part of the foundation 10 years later for string theory, showing how most of the 10 dimensions of space-time required by the “theory of everything” could be rolled up out of sight in what are now called Calabi-Yau spaces.

Three years later, Dr. Yau proved another important result about Einstein’s theory of general relativity: any solution to Einstein’s equations must have positive energy. Otherwise, said Dr. Strominger, the Harvard physicist, space-time would be unstable — “you could have perpetual motion.”

The result is that Dr. Yau has lived a crossover life. As a pure mathematician, he is “a major figure, perhaps the major figure,” as Michael Anderson of SUNY Stony Brook called him, in building up differential geometry, the study of curves and surfaces.

Dr. Hamilton, the Columbia mathematician, said Dr. Yau liked to be in the center of things, unlike others who liked to retreat into a corner and think. “He seems to thrive on being bombarded with all this information,” he said.

He is also an honorary physicist, using “his muscular style,” in the words of Brian Greene, a Columbia string theorist who worked with Dr. Yau as a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard, to smash equations and get the physics out of them. “He corners equations like a lion after its prey,” Dr. Greene said, “then he seals all the exits.”

Prizes and honors flowed Dr. Yau’s way after the Calabi triumph, including the Fields Medal, a MacArthur “genius” grant in 1985 and a National Medal of Science in 1997. He became a United States citizen in 1990. (He said he put away the money from the MacArthur grant for his two children’s college education.)

A Wandering Son Returns

Dr. Yau married Yu Yun, an applied physicist from Taiwan, in 1976. At one point, when his family had preceded him on a move to San Diego, an institute colleague, Demetrios Christodoulou, noticed that Dr. Yau would pick up the phone late every night and start singing into it in Chinese.

“Yau is full of surprises, I thought to myself, now he wants to become a great opera singer,” Dr. Christodoulou recalled in an e-mail message. “As I later found out, these songs were lullabies for his children.”

It was natural that as Dr. Yau’s star rose, his “mother country,” as he put it, sought to pull him into its orbit. When he made his first trip back to China, in 1979, Dr. Yau became one of several returning heroes. A century of unhappy encounters with the West had left China with a deep sense of scientific and technological inferiority.

Dr. Yau has devoted himself to building up Chinese mathematics and promoting basic research, arranging for Chinese students to come to the United States, donating money and books, and tapping rich friends to found mathematics institutes in Hong Kong, Beijing and Hangzhou. He even lived in Taiwan in the early 1990’s so his children would learn Chinese.

In his travels he became friendly with President Jiang Zemin, then the leader of the Communist Party, who impressed him as “a smart guy.” The impression was mutual. When Mr. Jiang recited the first line of a Chinese poem at a dinner honoring intellectuals, Dr. Yau showed off his learning by reciting back the entire poem.

In 2004, Dr. Yau was honored at the Great Hall of the People for his contributions to Chinese mathematics. In a speech he said that when he won the Fields Medal, “I held no passport of any country and should certainly be considered Chinese.”

That same year Dr. Chern died at 93. Dr. Strominger recalled a newspaper headline declaring that with Chern’s death, “the era of Yau” was about to begin.

It has not been a peaceful era.

For the last year Dr. Yau has carried on a campaign against Beijing University, accusing it of committing fraud by padding its faculty with big names from overseas and paying them lucrative salaries for a few months of work.

A survey in Science magazine showed that the number of such part-time professors in China had grown to 89 from 6 over the last six years, while the number of full-time professors had risen to 101 from 66. The arrangement allows Chinese universities to piggyback on the glory of work these people do in their other jobs. Dr. Yau said it also drains resources that should go to young researchers.

This summer, Beijing University redesignated some overseas scholars to part time from full time. All this has taken a toll. “Yau is not universally loved,” said Mr. Chan, the real estate developer. “He has paid a price.”

Dr. Yau agreed. “I am completely outspoken. And I do offend people,” he said, adding that his style was to be intensely critical, both of his students and of his colleagues’ ideas.

Confrontations in China go all the way to the top, because all the money comes from the government, Dr. Yau said. “The only reason I have the nerve to resist,” he said, “is I’m a Harvard professor. I don’t draw a penny from China.”

“If I didn’t have the Fields Medal,” he added, “I would be dead to them.”

A Messy Proof

Dr. Yau’s eagerness to help China can backfire, and that seems to have happened in the case of the Poincaré conjecture.

The conjecture, first set forth by Henri Poincaré in 1905, may be the most famous problem in mathematics and forms part of the foundation for topology, which deals with shapes. It says essentially that anything without holes is equivalent to a sphere.

In 1982, Dr. Hamilton of Columbia devised a method, known as the Ricci flow, to investigate the shapes of spaces. Dr. Yau was enthusiastic that this method might finally crack the Poincaré conjecture. He began working with Dr. Hamilton and urging others to work on it, with little success.

Then, in 2003, a Russian mathematician, Grigory Perelman, sketched a way to jump a roadblock that had stymied Dr. Hamilton and to prove the hallowed theorem as well as a more general one proposed by the Cornell mathematician William Thurston. Dr. Perelman promptly disappeared, leaving his colleagues to connect the dots.

Among those who took up that challenge, at the urging of Dr. Yau, were Huai-Dong Cao of Lehigh University, a former student, and Xi-Ping Zhu of Zhongshan University. Last June, Dr. Yau announced that they had succeeded and that the first complete proof would appear in The Asian Journal of Mathematics, at which he is the chief editor.

In a speech later that month during the string theory conference, Dr. Yau said, “In Perelman’s work, many key ideas of the proofs are sketched or outlined, but complete details of the proofs are often missing,” adding that the Cao-Zhu paper had filled some of these in with new arguments.

This annoyed many mathematicians, who felt that Dr. Yau had slighted Dr. Perelman. Other teams who were finishing their own connect-the-dots proofs said they had found no gaps in Dr. Perelman’s work. “There was no mystery they suddenly resolved,” said John Morgan of Columbia, who was working with Gang Tian of Princeton on a proof.

In August, Dr. Perelman was awarded the Fields Medal at a meeting of the International Mathematical Union in Madrid, but he declined to accept it. A week later a drawing in The New Yorker showed Dr. Yau trying to grab the Fields Medal from the neck of Dr. Perelman.

On his Web site, doctoryau.com, Dr. Yau has posted a 12-page letter showing what he and his lawyer say are errors in the article. The New Yorker has said it stands by its reporting. “My name is damaged in China,” Dr. Yau said. “I have to fix my reputation in China in order to help younger students.”

He denied that he had ever said there were gaps in Dr. Perelman’s work. “I said it is not understood by all people,” he said. “That is why it takes three more years.” As a “leading geometer,” Dr. Yau said he had a duty to dig out the truth of the proof.

Dr. Hamilton said, “In any long new work, it’s hard to figure out what’s going on.” It was natural, he said, that Dr. Yau would want people who had experience in the esoteric field of Ricci flow to check the proof.

Asked if promoting the Cao-Zhu paper so loudly had been a mistake, Dr. Yau said that even a small contribution to such a great achievement as proving the Poincaré conjecture would live in the history of science.

In addition, he said he wanted to encourage Dr. Zhu, who he said had been neglected by the Chinese establishment. Dr. Yau acknowledged that he also felt a duty to help explain Dr. Hamilton’s work.

In a twist, a flaw has been discovered in the Cao-Zhu paper. One of the arguments that the authors used to fill in Dr. Perelman’s proof is identical to one posted on the Internet in June 2003 by Bruce Kleiner, of Yale, and John Lott, of the University of Michigan, who had been trying to explicate Dr. Perelman’s work.

In an erratum to run in The Asian Journal of Mathematics, Dr. Cao and Dr. Zhu acknowledge the mistake, saying they had forgotten that they studied and incorporated that material into their notes three years ago.

In an e-mail message, Dr. Yau said the incident was “unfortunate” but reaffirmed his decision to expedite the paper’s publication. “Even after the correction, the paper provides many important new details and clarifications of Hamilton and Perelman’s proof of the Poincaré and Thurston conjectures.”

Many mathematicians are dismayed that the Poincaré triumph has become mired in a fight about credit and personalities. “In spite of the rivalries,” Dr. Hamilton said, “we are deeply dependent on each other’s work. None of us is working in a vacuum.”

About the Poincaré proof, he said, “I’ve never seen Yau say that Perelman hadn’t done it.” No one, he added, had been more responsible than Dr. Yau for creating the Ricci flow program that won Dr. Perelman his prize.

Dr. Morgan said he still regarded Dr. Yau as his friend. “He has done tremendous things for math,” he said. “He’s a great figure. He’s Shakespearean, larger than life. His virtues are larger than life, and his vices are larger than life.”

Dr. Yau said the Poincaré conjecture was bigger than any prize and beyond politics.

“I work on mathematics because of its great beauty,” he said. “History will judge this work, not a committee.”


[+/-] show/hide this post

Monday, October 16, 2006

China’s New Leftist - New York Times

China’s New Leftist - New York Times

October 15, 2006

China’s New Leftist

One day earlier this year I met Wang Hui at the Thinker’s Cafe near Tsinghua University in Bejing, where he teaches. A small, compact man with streaks of gray in his short hair and a pleasant face that always seems ready to break into a smile, he arrived, as he would to all our subsequent meetings, on an old-fashioned bicycle, dressed in dark corduroys, a suede jacket and a black turtleneck that would not be amiss on an American campus.

Co-editor of China’s leading intellectual journal, Dushu (Reading), and the author of a four-volume history of Chinese thought, Wang, still in his mid-40’s, has emerged as a central figure among a group of writers and academics known collectively as the New Left. New Left intellectuals advocate a “Chinese alternative” to the neoliberal market economy, one that will guarantee the welfare of the country’s 800 million peasants left behind by recent reforms. And unlike much of China’s dissident class, which grew out of the protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and consists largely of human rights and pro-democracy activists, Wang and the New Left view the Communist leadership as a likely force for change. Recent events — the purge of party leaders on anticorruption charges late last month and continuing efforts to curb market excesses — suggest that this view is neither utopian nor paradoxical. Though New Leftists have never directed government policy, their concerns are increasingly amplified by the central leadership.

In the last few years, Wang has reflected eloquently and often on what outsiders see as the central paradox of contemporary China: an authoritarian state fostering a free-market economy while espousing socialism. On this first afternoon, he barely paused for small talk before embarking on an analysis of the country’s problems. He described how the Communist Party, though officially dedicated to egalitarianism, had opened its membership to rich businessmen. Many of its local officials, he said, used their arbitrary power to become successful entrepreneurs at the expense of the rural populations they were meant to serve and joined up with real estate speculators to seize collectively owned land from peasants. (According to Chinese officials, 60 percent of land acquisitions are illegal.) The result has been an alliance of elite political and commercial interests, Wang said, that recalls similar alliances in the United States and many East Asian countries.

As he spoke about how market reforms have widened the gap between rich and poor, between rural and urban areas, smartly dressed students browsed through a highbrow collection (Leo Strauss, Jürgen Habermas), checked their e-mail and sipped their mochas. At the privately owned Thinker’s Cafe and the adjoining All Sages bookshop, Wang seemed to be famous. Students greeted him reverentially; the staff was extra attentive. Yet Wang still belongs to a minority. Recoiling from the excesses of Maoism and the failures of the old planned economy, most Chinese intellectuals, even those with no connection to the state, see the market economy as indispensable to China’s modernization and revival. Zhu Xueqin, a history professor at Shanghai University who is one of China’s best-known liberal intellectuals, told me that he wants more, not fewer, market reforms. For him, China’s present instability is caused not by economic forces but by a politically repressive regime that has prevented the emergence of a representative democracy and a constitutional government.

Wang readily acknowledges that China’s efforts at economic reform have not been without great benefits. He applauds the first phase, which lasted from 1978 to 1985, for improving agricultural output and the rural standard of living. It is the central government’s more recent obsession with creating wealth in urban areas — and its decision to hand over political authority to local party bosses, who often explicitly disregard central government directives — that has led, he said, to deep inequalities within China. The embrace of a neoliberal market economy has meant the dismantling of welfare systems, a widening income gap between rich and poor and deepening environmental crises not only in China but in the United States and other developed countries. For Wang, it is the task of intellectuals to remind the state of its old, unfulfilled obligations to peasants and workers.

Despite his invocation of socialist principles, Wang was quick to tell me that he dislikes the New Left label, even though he has used it himself. “Intellectuals reacted against ‘leftism’ in the 80’s, blaming it for all of China’s problems,” he said, “and right-wing radicals use the words ‘New Left’ to discredit us, make us look like remnants from the Maoist days.” Wang also doesn’t care to be identified with the radical intellectuals of the 60’s in America and Europe, to whom the term New Left was originally applied. Many of them, he said, had passion and slogans but very little practical politics, and not surprisingly, more than a few ended up with the neoconservatives, supporting “fantasy projects” like democracy in Iraq.

Wang prefers the term “critical intellectual” for himself and like-minded colleagues, some of whom are also part of China’s nascent activist movement in the countryside, working to alleviate rural poverty and environmental damage. Though broadly left wing, Dushu publishes writing from across the ideological spectrum. Wang’s own work draws on a broad range of Western thinkers, from the French historian Fernand Braudel to the globalization theorist Immanuel Wallerstein. “Intellectual quality is important to me,” Wang said. “I don’t want to run just any left-wing garbage.” The magazine has carried abstract debates on postcolonial theory as well as, he claims, some of the most interesting analyses in China of how the government’s urban-oriented reforms have damaged rural society. There are restrictions on what Dushu can publish, of course, and Wang is frank about them. As with all intellectual journals in mainland China, authors and editors at Dushu have to exercise a degree of self-censorship. Articles cannot directly criticize the leadership or deviate much from the official line on subjects that the Chinese government considers most sensitive — Taiwan or restive Muslim and Buddhist minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet.

“I get asked in Western countries, ‘How do you define your position?”’ Wang said. “‘Are you a dissident?’ I say no. What is a dissident? It is a cold-war category. And it has no meaning now. Many of the Chinese dissidents in America can return to China. But they don’t want to. They are doing well in the U.S. To people who ask me if we are dissidents, I say, we are critical intellectuals. Some government policies we support. Others, we oppose. It really depends on the content of the policy.”

Born in Yangzhou in the southeast province of Jiangsu, Wang was just 7 and entering primary school when the Cultural Revolution began in 1966. The decade-long chaos, which traumatized older generations, seems to have left benign memories for Wang. He remembers being taken by his school to work in the villages for a week or two during the school year. “My generation of urban intellectuals,” he said, with a hint of pride, “is the last to have firsthand experience of conditions in the countryside.”

He counts the 20 months he spent working in factories around Yangzhou after middle school as a valuable experience. In 1977, he took the first university entrance exams to be held after the Cultural Revolution, during which many universities were either shut or would admit only peasants, workers and soldiers. “Thousands of aspiring students,” he reminisced, “were competing for a single place.”

When he moved from Yangzhou to Beijing to begin his doctoral studies in the mid-80’s, Wang found himself part of an even more privileged class. “Intellectuals,” he said, “had been targeted during Mao’s time; now, post-Mao, they were the elite again.” And by then, Wang said, they all agreed on what needed to be done: China had to abandon its “feudal” and socialist traditions and catch up with the capitalist West. Scarred by the Cultural Revolution, intellectuals saw socialism in China as a failure. Consequently, they had, Wang argues, no real debate on whether a Western-style consumerist society could be successfully recreated or was environmentally sustainable in China. The West, especially the United States, was idealized.

Wang first began to develop his own views on contemporary China while working on a dissertation about one of the most admired of modern Chinese writers, Lu Xun (1881 1936). Lu Xun, Wang explained to me, was a writer of the left, but he was very critical of left-wing writers and activists. He criticized Chinese tradition, but was also an excellent classical scholar. He welcomed the Western idea of progress, but was also skeptical of it. The paradoxes in Lu Xun helped Wang to see that Chinese modernity could not be a simple matter of abandoning the old and embracing the new — as it had been for both Maoists and free-market capitalists.

For Wang, the problems associated with China’s uneven development were first identified by the demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989. Wang himself was one of the last protesters to leave the square on the morning of June 4, 1989, as the tanks of the People’s Liberation Army closed in. Normally rather brisk and matter-of-fact, he grew animated as he described in fluent, if occasionally idiosyncratic, English how a “broad social movement” began to grow out of the distress caused by the shock therapy of market reforms. The students demanding freedom of speech and assembly were certainly the most visible. But there were, he said, many more Chinese in the cities — workers, government officials and small businessmen — demanding that the government control corruption and inflation, which had shot up to 30 percent after price controls on basic commodities were lifted.

In the spring of 1989, Wang was a fellow at the prestigious Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Wang told me that he saw “democratic potential” in the protests and felt obliged to participate even though he had reservations about the students’ lack of “theoretical or methodological coherence.” For Wang, the student leaders recalled the Chinese intellectuals of the early 20th century, who were never more united than when they radically rejected everything in the past. Nevertheless, after the government sought to crush dissent by declaring martial law on May 20, 1989, Wang was drawn deeper into the movement. On the night of June 3, when the tanks and armored cars charged through Beijing, killing hundreds of unarmed resisters and injuring thousands more, Wang was among those assembled in the center of Tiananmen Square. He could hear the gunfire, but some of the more radical among the students still refused to leave.

Wang decided to stay and to try to persuade the students not to sacrifice their lives. “I knew,” he said, “that if the result was violence, it would be disastrous for the whole country.” Wang said that his fears were proved right: violence shrank the space for political debate, and the Chinese government used the period of intellectual silence that followed to begin dismantling more aspects of the welfare state, like the state-owned enterprises, that had long offered cradle-to-grave benefits to workers.

Eventually, the students advocating peaceful retreat prevailed and persuaded the People’s Liberation Army to give them safe passage in the southeast corner of the square. Just before dawn, hundreds of students left the square through a narrow corridor, jostled and taunted by hostile soldiers. Within minutes, the students dispersed. Some of them were arrested and sentenced to long prison spells; others fled to Hong Kong and eventually to the West; many others, like Wang, disappeared for a few weeks.

When Wang returned to Beijing in late 1989, the authorities were waiting for him. “That was the most difficult time for me,” he said. He was asked repeatedly: “What was your organization? Who were your associates?” After interrogations lasting for many months, he was sent to the northwestern province of Shaanxi, where dozens of other young scholars from Beijing were already undergoing — in the uniquely Chinese way — “re-education” by exposure to rural conditions.

In Wang’s case, punishment by pedagogy seems to have been more successful than Chinese authorities could have anticipated. He dates his “real education” to the time he spent in Shaanxi, one of the poorest regions of China. He was shocked by the obvious disparity between the coastal cities, then enjoying the first fruits of economic reform, and the provinces. He was shocked, too, by his own ignorance and that of his colleagues in the 1989 social movement. “We had no idea that the old order in much of rural China was in deep crisis,” he said.

The commune system in Shaanxi was dismantled as part of Deng Xiaoping’s reforms, and land was redistributed. But the area produced nothing of much value, not even enough food. Deepening poverty led to a sharp increase in crime and social problems; violent conflicts broke out over land; men took to gambling, beating up, even selling, their wives and daughters. Wang lived in a low-lying village where his dormitory was frequently flooded while he slept. Much of his daily work consisted of writing didactic pamphlets warning peasants against gambling and crime; he also worked on the reconstruction of a primary school that had been destroyed by floodwaters. “It was during that year,” Wang said, “that I realized how important a welfare system and cooperative network remained for many people in China. This is not a socialist idea. Even the imperial dynasties that ruled China kept a balance between rich and poor areas through taxes and almsgiving.

“People confine China’s experience to the Communist dictatorship and failures of the planned economy and think that the market will now do everything. They don’t see how many things in the past worked and were popular with ordinary people, like cooperative medical insurance in rural areas, where people organized themselves to help each other. That might be useful today, since the state doesn’t invest in health care in rural areas anymore.”

Many poor people Wang met during his year in Shaanxi saw him as the educated man from Beijing who would tell the mandarins of the central government to send them some help. “I felt burdened by this role,” Wang said. “I couldn’t tell them that I was in no position to do anything.” Wang returned, he told me, from his 10-month exile with a keen sense of the gap between the worlds of intellectuals and ordinary people.

During his time in Shaanxi, the influential Journal of Literary Review denounced his research on Lu Xun as an example of “bourgeois liberalization.” Nevertheless, Wang had no trouble returning to academic life.

Wang doesn’t like to talk much about 1989. He complains about the “stereotype” of China in the Western media conjured by Tiananmen. Nonetheless, our conversation about Tiananmen was unusual. While traveling through Chinese cities, I had found it hard to get people to talk about it. When Deng Xiaoping sought to bury the ghosts of Tiananmen for good by calling for speedy market reforms in 1992, he may well have calculated that the prospect of personal wealth — and access to Western brand-name goods — would compensate many newly enriched people for the lack of political democracy. If so, he seems to have been proved right. The largest public disturbance in China since Tiananmen occurred in August 1992, when hundreds of thousands of Chinese tried to buy shares in the newly opened stock exchange of Shenzen.

The effort to create wealth in urban areas through export-oriented industries — part of the “let some get rich first” policy announced by Deng Xiaoping and affirmed by his successors — has given the Chinese economy an average growth rate of 10 percent and made it the fourth largest in the world. Yet China remains one of the world’s poorest countries. More than 150 million people survive on a dollar a day. About 200 million of the rural population are crowding the cities and towns in search of low-paying jobs. More than four million Chinese participated in the 87,000 protests recorded in 2005, and these statistics may not fully convey the rage and discontent of Chinese living with one of the world’s highest income inequalities and deteriorating health and education systems, as well as the arbitrary fees and taxes imposed by local party officials. Much of this, Wang said, could be laid at the feet of the “right-wing radicals” or neoliberal economists who cite Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek (advocates of unregulated markets who inspired Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in the 80’s) and who argue for China’s integration into the global economy without taking into account the social price of mass privatization. And it is they, Wang added, who have held favor with the ruling elite and have dominated the state-run media.

Only in the last decade, Wang said, have intellectuals of the New Left begun to challenge the notion that a market economy leads inevitably to democracy and prosperity. Wang, who helped found an academic journal called Xueren (The Scholar) after returning from exile in 1991, was well placed to observe those intellectuals. As they came into greater contact with Western academics and scholars, they became more aware of problems not just in European and American societies but also in post-Communist countries that were trying to bring their planned economies closer to neoliberal models. China’s intention to join the World Trade Organization (which it did in 2001) provoked unexpectedly sharp debates among scholars. As Wang described it, the terms of the debate had changed: “Many people knew by then that globalization is not a neutral word describing a natural process. It is part of the growth of Western capitalism, from the days of colonialism and imperialism.” Which is not to say that the New Left embraced an easy antiglobalist position; it has been critical of recent anti-Japanese and anti-American outbursts among urban, middle-class Chinese — of what Wang dubbed “consumer nationalism.” That, Wang said, was the same kind of globalization that America advocates: “It is really a form of hypernationalism, which is why you hear talk of tariffs and penalties on China when American economic interests are hurt.”

Wang paused and then added: “Many people also learned that the reason the Chinese economy did not collapse like the Asian tiger economies in 1997 was that the national state was able to protect it. Now, of course, China with its export-dominated economy is more dependent on the Western world order, especially the American economy, than India.”

In January of this year, Wang published a long investigative article exposing the plight of workers in a factory in his hometown, Yangzhou, a city of about one million. According to Wang, in 2004 the local government sold the profitable state-owned textile factory to a real estate developer from the southern city of Shenzen. Worker-equity shares were bought for 30 percent of their actual value, and then more than a thousand workers were laid off after mismanagement of the factory led to losses. In July 2004, the workers went on strike. In what Wang calls an agitation without precedent in the history of Yangzhou, the workers obstructed a major highway, halted bus traffic and attacked the gates of local government buildings.

Wang told me that he was helping the workers to sue the local government. He had spent time working in a nearby factory before college and this, he said, made him feel a particular connection to them. He remembered that his pay had been low — less than $2 a month by current exchange rates — but, he said, what was crucial was that the workers he knew then felt secure in their jobs. “People claim,” he said, “that the market will automatically force the state to become more democratic. But this is baseless. We only have to think about the alliance of elites formed in the process of privatization. The state will change only when it is under pressure from a large social force, like the workers and peasants.”

Wang’s story about Yangzhou is not unique. There are many accounts of how local government officials controlling public property have amassed fortunes by privatizing state assets. According to a recent report by the activist Liu Xiaobo, more than 90 percent of the 20,000 richest people in China are related to senior government or Communist Party officials.

For Wang, democracy is not just a simple matter of expanding political freedom for the middle class or creating legal and constitutional rights for a minority already substantially empowered by market reforms. Democracy in China, he said, has to be based upon the active consent and mobilization of the majority of its population, and be able to ensure social and economic justice for them.

Yet for some New Left intellectuals, like Cui Zhiyuan, a close friend and collaborator of Wang’s who teaches political science at Tsinghua University, there is opportunity in the collision of capitalism and socialism. “There is more space here for new ideas,” Cui told me as he described why he had returned to China after many years in the United States. “The capitalist system is fixed in the West, but things are still in flux in places like China and India. We have a historic opportunity to build a better, more just society than the West.” For Cui, it is important to clarify the concepts first. “It is not helpful,” he said, “to see socialism and capitalism as opposed and separate. Both have traveled together in the 20th century. Not just European welfare states, even American capitalism has a socialist component, which was arrived at after compromise with the trade unions.”

In recent years, Cui has found a receptive and powerful audience on an issue that lies at the very foundation of the Chinese socialist state: the collective ownership of property. Liberal Chinese economists argue that private property is sacred and inviolable in a market economy, a radical idea in the Chinese context. In an article he published in Dushu in 2004, Cui challenged this notion, emphasizing the essentially communal nature of property ownership. He cited Thomas Jefferson’s decision to reword John Locke’s principles of life, liberty and property with life, liberty and happiness in the Declaration of Independence.

“Jefferson recognized,” he said, “that property rights emanate from society, not from nature. That’s why there was no specific article on property rights in the U.S. Constitution and it had to be brought in later through the Fifth Amendment.” Cui went on to relate with something close to glee that his article had circulated widely among legislators in the National People’s Congress, China’s Parliament, in 2004. It had helped, he said, to provoke a debate that led the Congress to adopt a compromise amendment to the constitution, similar in wording to the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which simply states that no person “be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

This spring it began to become clear that the New Left’s advocacy of a welfare state is being echoed within the Communist leadership, which is fearful of social instability and is keen to consolidate its power and legitimacy. In March, a few weeks before I met with Wang, the National People’s Congress convened in Beijing and unexpectedly became a forum for the first open ideological debate within the party for years. Legislators accused government officials of selling out China’s interests to market forces. Such was the antimarket mood that a bill to defend private property and grant land titles to farmers — one that both foreign investors in China and Chinese businessmen had been lobbying for — was not even discussed. Describing major new investments in rural areas, the Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, emphasized that “building a socialist countryside” was a “major historic task” before the Communist Party. He also outlined steps to balance economic growth with environmental protection.

A German journalist told me that it was the most left-wing speech he had heard from a senior Chinese leader during his eight years in Beijing: “Even American and European politicians don’t talk about achieving a Green G.D.P.” Wang agreed. He said that he was also pleased to see President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao focusing on relations with Asian countries. “We were too obsessed with the United States during Jiang Zemin’s time,” he said. “We really need to improve our relations with Japan and India. We belong to such old and distinguished civilizations, and we cannot just be simple followers and imitators of America.

“It is a huge achievement,” he added, a smile on his face, “that the premier should openly admit that health care and education is a failure. It has never happened before.” Wang said he thought that the government was sincere about eradicating rural poverty. But he was still cautious. “There has been so much decentralization in China,” he said, “that it is not easy to translate central government policy into action.” Last month, in the first purge of a high-ranking party member since 1995, the central leadership removed the Shanghai party chief on corruption charges, leading to speculation that there would be a reconfiguring of relations between the central government and provincial leaders and perhaps a shift in policy toward shoring up social-welfare systems and stemming pollution. Wang remained skeptical. “The Shanghai case is encouraging at least,” Wang said in a recent e-mail message. “I think there will be some political results from it, but they are results rather than reasons.”

The dangers of failing to improve conditions for the majority are clear to Wang: “If we don’t improve the situation, there will be more authoritarianism. We have already seen in Russia how people prefer a strong ruler like Putin because they are fed up with corruption, political chaos and economic stagnation. When radical marketization makes people lose their sense of security, the demand for order and intervention from above is inevitable.”

In attacking corrupt local governments, the New Left often seems to want to institute big-brotherly government of the kind authoritarian politicians like. Certainly the growing accord between the central government’s socialist rhetoric and New Left ideas makes many uneasy. Lung Yingtai, a well-known Taiwanese writer and democracy advocate, told me earlier this year that she was wary of the New Left intellectuals, who, she said, appear too close ideologically to the Communist regime. Taking this view one step further, Liu Junning, a popular liberal political theorist who left China in 1999 after being blacklisted by the Chinese government but has since returned, claimed that the New Left was another name for the nationalistic old guard of the Communist Party, which was inspired by hatred of the West.

While this seems an exaggeration, Wen Tiejun, a former government official who runs rural reconstruction projects and is identified as New Left, had attended what he called “brainstorming sessions” with Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao. Typically, intellectuals in Communist countries (Vaclav Havel or Adam Michnik, for example) have gained moral authority by assuming a critical stance toward the all-powerful state. How do New Left thinkers in China calibrate their relationship with a state that has imprisoned many of their colleagues and generally shown little tolerance for criticism of the party?

When I posed this question to Cui, he momentarily lost his exuberant manner. “It is a very important question,” he said. “How to deal with the government, both morally and intellectually. This is a big challenge for us.”

Cui does not regard the Communist regime as a “totality.” There were, he said, many different aspects of it, at both the local and central levels. “Almost every day,” Cui said, “The New York Times carries reports of peasants agitating against the Communist government, but if you listen to what the peasants are saying, they are telling the central government that the local government has violated their rights. So even the peasants can see the different aspects of the state, who supports them and who doesn’t.”

Wang Xiaoming, professor of cultural studies at Shanghai University, positions himself to the right of Wang Hui but says that he sympathizes with the New Left’s pragmatic attitude toward the Communist regime. “Civil society is very weak in China,” he said, “and since the government is the most active agent of change, we have to push the government to do what it should do besides pushing the government to give up some of its powers.”

When I met with Wang Hui for the last time, he dismissed any claims about increased New Left influence over the regime. “What we have tried to do is create an intellectual situation in which new policies can be explored,” he said. “I know that many leaders read Wen Tiejun’s article; they also read Cui’s article on property rights. There have been other articles in Dushu that have been equally influential, and I am pleased about this. But we have no other connection with the regime.”

Wang also seems to have no anxiety that ideological convergence with the regime will turn New Left intellectuals into pro-government policy wonks and hacks, part of an old Chinese tradition of intellectuals advising the state. “We look at things from a Chinese perspective naturally, but we also try to think beyond the framework of the nation-state,” he said. “People ask in the West, How could China develop capitalism with an authoritarian state? But that’s ignoring how modern capitalism grew in the West, without much democracy and with the help of imperialism and colonialism. You have to ask whether this unique economic model of the West can be globalized without great wars and destruction of the environment. This is not an abstract issue. China has stopped felling its forests, most of which have disappeared, but some country still has to produce wood for Chinese consumption.”

At our last meeting, Wang also spoke more about a subject Cui had brought up with me: how the rise of China and India throws up new challenges and possibilities with profound implications for the world at large. “Western societies have been on top for the last two centuries and shaped the world with the decisions they made,” he said. “China and India will now play equally crucial roles in the new century. But what will they be? I think it is very important for Chinese and Indian intellectuals not just to imitate the West. They have to explore alternatives to the Western model of modernity. Otherwise, the ‘consumer nationalists’ are already saying, ‘America was on top; now we are on top.”’

Wang laughed, and added, “This is not interesting.”

Pankaj Mishra last wrote for the magazine about Tibetan exiles. His most recent book is “Temptations of the West: How to be Modern in India, Pakistan, Tibet and Beyond.”


[+/-] show/hide this post