The definition of heroes DO shift over time, place and group, there's no denying that. For example, during the pre-Han Dynasty period, everybody and their mother hated the First Emperor (it's a funny thing, people always whine and gripe about the negatives done to them when the positives either go unmentioned or unappreciated, perhaps that is why HISTORIANS views are thought of as being more objective). As I've mentioned already, I have no problems with anyone labelling the First Emperor as either savior or devil. What I do have a problem is that someone with no knowledge of China can go out and claim that the commies somehow use this movie to spread propaganda. I have a great deal of respect for many historians, Chinese or not, over the centuries. I don't claim to be as knowledgeable than any of them. Quite frankly, the only advantage towards MODERN DAY historians is this CONSENSUS . The First Emperor was never studied comprehensively in ANY other period. To talk of the achievements of a previous emperor in a previous dynasty would draw unwanted attention from officials of later dynasties for fears of rebellion. It is also public knowledge that several of the later dynasties publically bashed previous dynasties (whether fairly or not) to glorify themselves. The Qing Dynasty is among the worst at this. Not to mention NOT all dynasties were critical of the Qin. AT BEST you can claim some dynasties hates the Qin while others do not. On the other hand, the issue of the First Emperor has pretty much been beaten to death in comtemporary eras. The at least several hundred Chinese historical journals of varying degrees of reputation argued day and night, THEN reached this consensus. The research and debate is more comprehensive than ANY era on this subject. It is not just one historian coming out to say "well, I think..." The consensus among a great many historians is ALMOST ALWAYS given more weight than if one says it himself. And the words of one historian is better than that of an idiot.
Btw, in regarding your idiotic views of pseudo-communism and their propaganda, the commies pretty much aired all their dirty laundries in this article. Hardly a good way to brainwash people. http://english1.peopledaily.com.cn/200409/01/eng20040901_155578.html
okay this thread got my curiosity going so I said what the hell and went and asked two of my chinese coworkers their opinion of the first emperor of china. the first guy, born in shanghai I believe, was busy and so gave the hurried reply of, “yeah, he was a good ruler. he built the great wall. he was definitely good for china.” the second guy (older than the first, born and raised in beijing, attended and completed graduate school in the U.S., got a job here, became a U.S. citizen) gave me a more detailed answer. answering the question of whether or not qin shihuang was good or bad (or, as being debated in this thread, a hero or not a hero), he replied that it is not an easy question to answer. in this guy’s words (paraphrased from my memory TIFWIW), the first thing he said was that qin shihuang killed a lot of people. however, he did three things that turned out good for china. he unified the language, he standardized currency, and he brought the rule of law. even so, he was one of the most powerful rulers in the history of china, and he used that power to crush any threats to his rule (killed a lot of people), including scholars. i then asked him how qin shihuang was portrayed in the schools he attended growing up in Beijing, and he said basically what I’ve already described, that they were taught that qin shihuang was a mixed bag. he even said that in his later years of schooling in beijing (the guy’s like in his late 30’s to early 40’s from what I can guess), the teachings about qin shihuang even became negative, emphasizing the more brutal, tyrannical aspects of his rule. okay, so it’s just two random chinese people here at my workplace, but hey, i figured they’re here, I work with’em, what the hell, why don’t i just mosey on over and get their take on it? reporting from work, this is moo, clutch bbs eyewitness news.
Aside from that, on a more personal note, he is a character with significant character flaws. He is paranoid (although I'm sure I would be if there were so many attempts on my life), power hungry (largely due to his childhood as a hostage and a man named Liao Ai once tried to take over his throne, with the help of the First Emperor's mother). He is very much afraid of dying, especially late in his life, which made him crazy and (most likely) caused him to start killing people. In ShiJi, Sima Yi found writing of his various court officials as well as diplomats and rulers from other countries. Although Sima Yi did not make a personal opinion of the First Emperor, let's just say these accounts of his personality aren't very flattering.
