One of my favourite short pieces of writing in this vein is "The Emperor's New Clothes", Hans Christian Andersen's 1837 tale of two weavers who weave the finest set of clothes imaginable for the King. The only catch? The clothes will be invisible to anyone who is too stupid to appreciate their beauty. All along the way, all the King's advisers, his family and the King himself do nothing but praise the work of the weavers. In the climax of the story the King parades through the city, naked but proud, and a young child shouts out, "But he hasn't got anything on!" Though he suspects that this might be true, the King proceeds to walk proudly through the town.
![]() |
| The Weavers (public domain) |
The story is, of course, about vanity and our deep human desire not to look foolish. It's more relevant - and more subversive - meaning lies in what it shows us about power. We see how those in power are deferred to, agreed with, and praised even when they are clearly wrong. The sycophancy that accompanies power is perhaps the most dangerous corollary to power as it strips away the possibility to point out folly. In Andersen's story, it is the King who pays the price on one level, but it is the kingdom that suffers the most as the charlatan weavers profit from the people's silence. It is their tax money that 'clothed' the King in his delusion.
Andersen reminds us all that vanity breeds fools, but he also reminds us that we do indeed have a duty to speak and to question.
In my course we study the phenomena of urbanisation. We look at the earliest known urban civilisation (Sumerian/Mesopotamian) and the traits they share with other urban societies. This year, when we get into the modern part of the unit (in which we examine the advantages, disadvantages, and problems of cities today) we looked at China's current plan to move 250,000,000 people, mostly farmers, from rural areas into brand new cities. Oh, and by the way they plan to finish by 2025. The plan is the largest migration of people in the history of our species.
The Chinese government is spending unimaginable sums of money for many reasons, but the primary driver is the belief that city dwellers will participate more fully in the market/consumption economy. Once they work for wages (rather than as farmers), they will become shoppers and diners sustaining numerous small and large businesses in the cities where they live. China wants this because they neither want to nor do they believe they can remain the world's low cost manufacturing centre. If domestic consumption can rise, then incomes and standards of living will rise as well, transforming China into a fully developed economy. Or so the thinking goes.
The results so far have been mixed at best. Yes, the cities are being built and many people moved. But as the article above and the video below show, many of the cities are like hollow shells. The residents who are there tend stores without customers or live in half empty buildings. The other implications of the plan - impacts on culture, agricultural production, and environment - are other major question marks.
So how does this connect to the Emperor's New Clothes? And subversion?
In class we were discussing the implications of China's plan, and a student asked how a decision like this gets made given all the potential for things to go wrong. Keep in mind that we are talking about Grade 6 here, so even asking that question is impressive. I explained a bit about China's government structure and that China has the ability to implement sweeping policy changes that most countries cannot (or at least not as quickly).
Hannah, with all the confidence in the world, raised her hand and said, "It's the Emperor has no clothes. People are afraid to disagree with a plan that other people say will work."
How do you recognise moments of brilliance like that? Praise is nice (and I did make sure everyone in class knew that Hannah's comment was brilliant), but how do you recognise something so incredibly insightful? To be really honest, this was one of the proudest moments of my career - to see a student connect two wildly different topics and to use the power of story to understand the essence of power itself.
I decided to write this post in part to show my respect for Hannah, but I also wrote it so that I don't forget how education can subvert power and give us the tools to curb its abuses.
I have a feeling that Hannah might just grow up to be the voice in the crowd pointing out for everyone that 'the Emperor has no clothes.'











