the ideological transformation of 20th century chinese literature

The Ideological Transformation of 20th Century Chinese Literature

The Ideological Transformation of

20th Century Chinese Literature

Xie Mian

Published by

Enrich Professional Publishing, Inc.

Suite 208

Davies Pacific Center

841 Bishop Street

Honolulu, HI, 96813

Website: www.enrichprofessional.com

A Member of Enrich Culture Group Limited

Hong Kong Head Office:

11/F, Benson Tower, 74 Hung To Road, Kwun Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

China Office:

Rm 309, Building A, Central Valley, 16 Haidian Middle Street, Haidian District, Beijing, China

Singapore Office:

16L, Enterprise Road, Singapore 627660

Trademarks: SILKROAD PRESS and related trade dress are trademarks or registered trademarks of

Enrich Professional Publishing, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries, and

may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective

owners.

Chinese original edition © 2009 China Renmin University Press

By Xie Mian

English edition © 2016 by Enrich Professional Publishing, Inc.

With the title The Ideological Transformation of 20th Century Chinese Literature

Translated by Charlie Ng

Edited by Charlie Ng

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,

electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval

system now known or to be invented, without prior written permission from the Publisher.

ISBN (Hardback) 978-1-62320-026-8

ISBN (pdf) 978-1-62320-079-4

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject

matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal,

accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the

services of a competent professional person should be sought.

ContentsIntroduction A Centenary of New Chinese Literature .........................................1

Part I The Historical Destiny of Chinese Literature ...............................21

Part II On Contemporary Chinese Literature ..........................................49

Part III A New Era of Chinese Literature ...................................................69

Part IV Post-New Era and Cultural Transformation ..............................137

Conclusion A Memorial for Literature (1949–1999) .......................................149

Afterword ...........................................................................................................167

Notes ...........................................................................................................171

Bibliography ...........................................................................................................179

Index ...........................................................................................................187

A Centenary of New Chinese Literature

Introduction

2


A Centenary of New Chinese LiteratureThe beginning of the New Literature Movement (xinwenxue yundong 新文學

運動) of modern China could be dated around 100 years ago, signified by the experiments of modern new poetry in 1916. If we take into account the “poetry revolution,” “literary revolution,” and “fiction revolution” promoted in the Late Qing dynasty, the course of the development of new Chinese literature spanned for more than 100 years. The 20th century was an important period of transformation for the Chinese society, which was also a significant time of change for Chinese literature. Chinese literature experienced an abrupt break from the tradition of ancient Chinese literature that developed over the previous thousands of years. The history of modern Chinese literature began at where the history of ancient Chinese literature ended. The history of modern Chinese literature was marked by the successive publication of representative works such as Hu Shi’s Changshi ji 嘗試集 (Experiments), Lu Xun’s “Kuangren riji” 狂人日記 (Diary of a Madman), and Guo Moruo’s “Nüshen” 女神 (The Goddess).

The 20th century was a troubled period for China and the whole world. The devastation of the two world wars left survivors of all races with mournful memories that still haunt us today. In China, countless rebels and exiles occurred in a turbulent period of various movements and revolutions. However, these events were more destructive than constructive. In terms of remolding the Chinese national spirit, there was no other event more important and influential than the establishment of new Chinese literature, which steered a decisive turn for the development of the psychology, mentality, and lifestyle of Chinese people.

The Chinese intellectuals’ determination to replace ancient Chinese literature with modern Chinese literature can be described by using a metaphor: the foresight of progressive Chinese intellectuals compelled them to break the antique vase handed down to them from their ancestors in order to pursue a new literature to which the Chinese society and people could be more related. This antique vase was the ancient Chinese literature that generations of Chinese educated men shaped for thousands of years. The cost for the breaking off from tradition was immense. The loss was a long-lasting but inevitable pain in the history of Chinese culture. Only with this outright severance could Chinese culture earn its revival in the recent 100 years. The May Fourth Movement (wusi yundong 五四運動) promoted a new literature written in vernacular Chinese (baihuawen 白話文). The influence of the literary reform became prevalent in the everyday life of the Chinese

3


society throughout the century. The linguistic reform radically changed the past separation of oral and written expressions. Such a change profoundly ameliorated the mentality and living condition of Chinese people.

Since the late Qing dynasty, the nation that endured unprecedented suffering determined to strengthen itself and renew its society. However, this would only be an impossible dream without radically changing the language people used. One of the basic aspects of New Literature that Hu Shi and his fellows promoted was the emphasis on a fundamental change in literary form. Hu Shi discussed his concept of new poetry from the perspective of form:1

Formal restrictions limit the free development of the spirit and constrain the full expression of good content. If we yearn for new content and a new spirit, we must break away from the manacles that chain our spirit. Therefore, the recent new poetry movement in China is an emancipation of poetic form. Thanks to the emancipation, poetry is enriched with abundant subject materials, precise observations, profound idealism, and complicated emotions.

Although his point was made on poetry, the same concept could be applied to all other genres. The emancipation of literary form enabled new spirit, new thoughts, and new knowledge of the age to be conveyed to people effectively through a language that unified oral and written expressions. Not only was the mentality of people renewed and their knowledge enhanced, new ways of expressing emotions and thinking also emerged.

To forgo the refined and elegant ancient Chinese literature was a painful and apologetic process. However, the release of linguistic expression from formal restrictions enabled people to communicate new ideas freely, and the effect was far-reaching in both Chinese literature and culture. The cultural revival was considered worthwhile despite the immense cost. From this perspective, the emergence of New Literature was the most important event for Chinese people in the 20th century. Wars, political upheavals, natural disasters, and epidemics were bygone events, but the influence of the revolution brought by the establishment of New Literature persists until today, making the New Literature Movement the most profound and influential event in modern China. Although it started out as a literary event, its influence went well beyond the literary realm to every aspect of the Chinese culture and society, permanently changing the mentality of Chinese people. Some commentators claimed that the New Literature Movement caused the discontinuity of Chinese culture. We should be careful with such a general claim. In fact, classical literary Chinese (wenyan 文言) and vernacular Chinese have

4


always been a part of Chinese culture, although the change in their use in written expression was significant, the cultural connections are still present. The claim of discontinuity is indeed a reductive argument.

Besides promoting radical changes in Chinese society through literature, progressive Chinese intellectuals who launched the May Fourth Movement also advocated the import and transplant of Western humanism to China. As Chinese intellectuals believed strongly in the responsibility of literature to “save the nation,” they actively explored new trends of thought to enlighten their fellow countrymen. They maintained that personal dignity and independence, individualism, and freedom of thought and expression were fundamental values of mankind. Surging trends of Western thoughts delivered Chinese people from feudal ideology and helped to shape China into a modern civilization. The promotion of new thoughts might not seem as urgent and direct as the renewal of the material base of society in the then newly established modern China, yet the country’s power could not be consolidated without the renewal of people’s mentality. Comparing to saving the nation, enlightening the people was considered more fundamental by progressive Chinese intellectuals.

The significance of Zhou Zuoren’s “Ren de wenxue” 人的文學 (Human Literature) was comparable to that of the writings on the New Literature Movement of Hu Shi and Chen Duxiu as literary enlightenment for the new era. In this rather short essay, Zhou pointed out: “What we are now promoting as New Literature, to put simply, is ‘human literature.’ We should oppose to literature that is non-human.”2 He upheld the spirit of humanism: “Human literature is literature that records and examines aspects of human life on the basis of humanism.”3 He proposed individualist humanism and emphasized the coexistence of self-love and love for others—self-interest and altruism that is based on equal individual status and dignity. However, as the intellectuals became more occupied with the unstable condition of the country, they paid less attention to spiritual enlightenment eventually. They engaged more eagerly in activities for revitalizing the Chinese society and saving the nation than emancipating the spirit of individuals.

The challenge that the New Literature Movement raised against ancient Chinese literature originated in the Chinese cultural forerunners’ ardent desire to strengthen the nation and renew the people. The country suffered from immense hardship which compelled the intellectuals to search for effective methods to solve the problems. They keenly promoted the development of industries, military defense, national governance, and science, but the results were not satisfactory. The promotion of New Literature was also an attempt to save the nation. The intellectuals were ready to sacrifice the treasure of ancient Chinese literature in exchange for a modern Chinese mind. These intellectuals underwent a transformative process to

5


reach this recognition. In the beginning, they believed that China’s weakness was due to the unhealthy body of the Chinese, as indicated by the name that the Western powers used to designate the Chinese, “sick man of East Asia” (dongya bingfu 東亞

病夫) during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Therefore, the first thing they attempted to renew was science. However, they later realized that the physical body of the public was actually in good condition; what’s weak and sick with them was their mentality and spirit. In his “Preface” to Nahan 吶喊 (Call to Arms), Lu Xun recalled the experience of seeing a reel slide of a Chinese man arrested and decapitated by the Japanese for being a secret agent for the Russian. The masses of Chinese audience at the scene appeared apathetic. Lu Xun remarked:4

Medical science was not so important after all. The people of a weak and backward country, however strong and healthy they might be, could only serve to be made examples of or as witnesses of such futile spectacles; and it was not necessarily deplorable if many of them died of illness. The most important thing, therefore, was to change their spirit; and since at that time I felt that literature was the best means to this end, I decided to promote a literary movement.

When Lu Xun discussed the reason for his choice of writing fiction, he elucidated his view on literature:5

I still believe in the vision of enlightenment I embraced decades ago. Such enlightenment must act on the level of human life, and it must enhance human life. I detest the old popular view that regarded fictional works as mere books for leisure and the aesthetic principle of “art for art’s sake” as a trendy way to kill time. Therefore, my subject matters usually come from the lives of unfortunate people in the sick society. I aim at revealing social problems and sufferings so as to call for people’s attention to seek remedy.

Many Chinese intellectuals held the same belief, including Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao, and other participants of the May Fourth Movement. They believed firmly in literature’s function in social reform.

However, their high expectation on literature overloaded it with incommensurate responsibility. The development of literature in the 20th century was negatively affected. Although it is true that literature has its effects on shaping the spirit of people, such effects are far from being direct and immediate. Literature operates in aesthetic ways to appeal to people’s feelings and acts on people’s mind gradually and indirectly. Usually literature is considered similar to art; they both influence

6


people’s behaviors through influencing their feelings and emotions. This kind of influence concerns mainly the enhancement and refinement of human affect. It is fair enough to say that literature itself is only a kind of lubricant but not an effective remedy for social sickness.

Nevertheless, forerunners of the New Literature Movement treated literature as the most important and even the only means to save the nation. The extra responsibility that was imposed upon literature led to undesirable consequences for literature later in the century. While in the early 20th century, modern Chinese intellectuals relied on literature to save the nation, literature was later wrongly accused of bringing bad effects to the stability of the Communist regime after the establishment of New China. The devastating political events that were borne upon literature from the 40s to the 70s had their remote cause in the development of new Chinese literature early in the century.

I have mentioned that the emergence of New Literature began with radical changes in the linguistic vehicle (the promotion of vernacular literature) and the content (the promotion of human literature). After the success of the promotion of vernacular literature, writers should have proceeded to develop human literature, yet due to the pressing obligation imposed upon literature by the Chinese intellectuals and society, New Literature started out with a bias towards realism and the purpose of “for human life” (為人生). The development of New Literature was closely bound with China’s social condition from its inception. To borrow the title of a short story of Lu Xun, New Literature was largely considered the “medicine” for the sick society at that time. The sickness not only referred to the physiological sickness of Hua Shuan’s son, but also the spiritual sickness of Hua Shuan for his superstitious belief in the medical use of a bun dipped in human blood, as well as the tragedy of the sacrificed young revolutionary, Xia Yu, and the crowd that surged to see the execution of the revolutionary. This now-classic of New Literature, imbued with coldness, reflects an intense sense of hopelessness and indifference of the sick society.

“Yao” 藥 (Medicine) was written in 1919, precisely the same year in which the New Literature Movement started. The Chinese intellectuals of the early 20th century endorsed literature with heavy responsibilities. Lu Xun’s writings produced in 1919 were impregnated with voices of agony and anxiety. These were the outcry of a consciousness awaking to the immense weight of history, struggling to break through the suffocation of an iron house. Lu Xun’s view of the situation was bleak. Believing that his generation “is destined to sacrifice for the debt left by the long history of old China,” Lu Xun expressed his deep sorrow: “We have to wail our loveless, desperate lament…until the old debt is written off.”6

The literary works of Lu Xun were representative of the situation of literature

7


in the early 20th century. They epitomized the nature of New Literature. In the writings of Lu Xun, we see no sign of happiness but only grave meditation and disheartened misery. They were solitary outcries released from a dark iron house. In “Kuangren riji,” another groundbreaking work of New Literature, the absence of happiness and the main character’s eccentric and confusing logic contributed to the story’s gloominess. Nonetheless, this work was a social critique expressed in an ironic way that aimed at enlightening Lu Xun’s fellow countrymen. While everyone believed their society was as normal as usual, only the madman discovered the abnormality of history: “When I flick through the history books, I find no dates, only those fine Confucian principles ‘benevolence, righteousness, morality’ snaking their way across each page. As I studied them again, through one of my more implacably sleepless nights, I finally glimpsed what lay between every line, of every book: ‘Eat people!’”7

New Chinese Literature was born out of the Chinese intellectuals’ desire to represent the downfall of society and sufferings of Chinese people. It responded to Lu Xun’s plea for “revealing social problems and sufferings so as to call for people’s attention to seek remedy.”8 It was destined to be infused with a weighty tone which could be found in almost every representative literary work of the time. For example in Cao Yu’s Richu 日出 (The Sunrise), the last words of the young heroine Chen Bailu, a victim of the corrupted society, conveyed a dismal vision of life: “The sun is risen, and the darkness is left behind. But the sun is not for us, for we shall be asleep.”9 The deep despair still moved us with its sharp painfulness.

In Guo Moruo’s “Fenghuang niepan” 鳳凰涅槃 (Phoenix Nirvana), the rebirth of the phoenix was attained with the cost of self-sacrifice. New Poetry was no less distressing than fiction and drama. The masterpieces of Ai Qing were infused with woeful lamentation. The motif of love portrayed in New Literature was chiefly closely related to the motif of revolution. Yu Dafu’s famous work, “Chenlun”沉淪 (Sinking), told the desolate life of a sexually repressed Chinese young man who studied in Japan. His last words, “O China, my China, you are the cause of my death! ... I wish you could become rich and strong soon,”10 although ridiculously and far-fetchingly connected personal misfortune with a populist patriotism, reflected the high expectation of modern Chinese writers on literature.

However, besides enlightenment and acculturation, literature is also related to entertainment and leisure as it produces a sense of pleasure through aesthetic effects. As an art, literature represents writers’ artistic ideals and aesthetic pursuits. During the May Fourth era, the general atmosphere of emancipation and freedom allowed bold experiments with the functions of literature. Different literary genres and styles coexisted harmoniously for a short period, for instance, writers’ groups with different views on literary writing, the Association for Literary Studies

8


(wenxue yanjiu hui 文學研究會) that supported “literature for human life’s sake” and the Creation Society (chuangzao she 創造社) that supported “literature for art’s sake,” had their respective supporters. For poetry, poets of different schools such as realism, the Crescent Moon School (xinyue pai 新月派), modernism, and symbolism competed with each other on an equal basis.

By the late 20s, the situation was radically changed. The rise of leftist aesthetic thought altered the trend of literary criticism. Literary portrayal of class struggle became a criterion for judging the value of a literary work. As most members of the Creation Society took up a more radical stand, the literary revolution of the May Fourth Movement changed quickly to the promotion of revolutionary literature. The expression of individuality and pleasure in literature was severely ridiculed. Late members of the Creation Society voiced the most vigorous critique against the promotion of individualism and aesthetic enjoyment in literature. Most of these writers were returned students from Japan and ardent advocates of proletarian literature. Cheng Fangwu’s essay, “Wancheng women de wenxue geming” 完成

我們的文學革命 (Accomplish Our Literary Revolution), composed in 1927, was representative of the leftist critique. It fiercely criticized the literary circle at that time: “Writers write freely as if their mouths have been sealed for a long time, and what they concern about is always personal expression… I never expect that they would fall into the depravity of pleasure-seeking so quickly.”11 Cheng Fangwu asserted that this is not a healthy trend for literary composition: “Seeing the pursuit of pleasure as the basis of life implies a self-deceived satisfaction in a narrow-minded world; what it concerns about is only idleness, idleness, nothing else but idleness.”12

In fact, even literary pioneers who had a strong sense of social responsibility such as Lu Xun approved a certain degree of aesthetic pursuit in literature. His stand was not as absolute as the late members of the Creation Society. In his famous essay, “Xiaopinwen de weiji”小品文的危機 (The crisis of the literary essay), Lu Xun asserted that: “Literary essays about survival should be daggers and spears; they should fight for survival together with their readers.”13 However, he also mentioned that literary essays could “give people a sense of pleasure and relaxation.”14 His definition of “pleasure and relaxation” was neither “entertainment” nor “comfort and numbness,” but “recuperation that helps people to prepare for work and fight.”15 This definition represented the basic spirit of the time. On the one hand, to reform society was the prime and foremost function of literature. Therefore, literary essays were described as “daggers and spears” that people used to fight for survival. On the other hand, literature also responded to the general atmosphere of the pursuit of individual emancipation and respected individual existence and desire. The liberal and democratic aspect of literature allowed for pleasure and

9


relaxation.The styles of New Literature were once diverse and heterogeneous. In spite of

the presence of competitions and oppositions, different literary proponents were not exclusive to each other, and none of them claimed sole authority. The relatively free literary atmosphere was a general phenomenon at that time. For example, the two important literary groups, the Association for Literary Studies and the Creation Society, held different aims and beliefs but were able to develop their respective paths. The Association for Literary Studies proclaimed that: “It is no long appropriate to treat literature as word games for entertainment or a pastime to comfort a frustrated life.”16 According to Mao Dun’s introduction, the group believed that “literature should reflect social reality and explore general questions of human life.”17 The principle and aim of the Creation Society were completely different. Its members were advocates of “art for art’s sake.” They emphasized that: “Literature should fulfil its mission for itself despite all its external missions… There are many people who consider this a particularly high mission. They are believers of ‘art for art’s sake.’”18 However, writers of the Creation Society still showed keen concern for society and their era. They regarded themselves the “offspring of the time” bearing the yoke of society.19 The differences and similarities of the literary groups showed that while different literary strands had the freedom to express themselves during the May Fourth Era, they were inevitably subjected to the miserable social reality.

The intervention of revolutionary consciousness greatly empowered the viewpoint that literature should serve social purposes. The core of this consciousness was class theory, which conceptualized an individual as a social being within a class hierarchy. Different social classes were influenced by contradicting political and ideological consciousness and had to engage in class struggles. Marxist theory was effectively grafted to the Chinese society that was already loaded with complicated contradictions. It created an illusion that a promising way for building a better and stronger society was finally in sight, and this foreign theory would provide a solution to the domestic problems that China was facing. New Literature’s aim of being a form of social critique for promoting social improvement was compatible with the radical political stand of Marxist theory. The originally vague design of literary revolution found a better political direction.

During the late 1920s, a large amount of literary criticism characterized by a heavy political tone was published. These articles fervidly criticized the pursuit of literary pleasure: “All kinds of pleasure are labyrinths that lead people astray.”20 Cheng Fangwu believed that “capitalism is in its final stage (imperialism), it is time for the advent of a complete social change for mankind.”21 He further censured the current literary trend: “Under the suppression of capitalism and feudalism, we

10


have already initiated our national revolution regardless our feebleness. However, our literary movement—a division of the general movement of emancipation—is still daydreaming with eyes wide-opened.”22

The literary revolution of the May Fourth Movement unfolded under the context of China’s social crisis. Promoters attempted to resolve the social crisis through literary means. For a long period of time, the goals and methods of implementation of such pursuit were uncertain, vague, and contradictory. However, by the late 1920s, the pursuit’s encounter with radical revolutionary thought invigorated the New Literature Movement. The Marxist and Communist theories that returned Chinese students advocated brought a new hope to the Chinese society, and people believed that a new social revolution was going to take place in China. As the intellectuals of the May Fourth Movement struggled with the contradiction arose between their missions of saving the nation and enlightening people, the import of revolutionary thought resolved it. They decided that saving the nation was more urgent than enlightening the people. The intellectuals gradually agreed on equating political revolution to saving the nation.

After the Chinese literary circle resolved the aforementioned contradiction, the next goal would be to resolve the contradiction between literature’s social value and its value for individuals, which was more complicated to disentangle. As the promotion of human literature in early May Fourth Movement fade out from the scene, voices that supported individualism still echoed in the air. Rebuke of individualism was initially expressed in the late 1920s and became rampant during the 1950s and 1960s. By the 1990s, it finally came to a decline. The context for the critique was complicated, but the basic motive was social pragmatism. The promotion of revolutionary literature inevitably rejected individualism because the actualization of revolution required collective effort. In literature, collective values and interest were considered more important than individualism. Revolutionary literature was by definition closely related to collective thought and social interest.

Jiang Guangci’s discussion on the above issue was the most copious and detailed. In his essay, “Guanyu geming wenxue”關於革命文學 (On Revolutionary Literature), Jiang placed literature in a particular socio-political environment:23

Modern revolution should subvert the social system that is founded on individualism. It should create a brighter and more equal social system that is founded on collectivism…. Revolutionary literature should be a literature that opposes individualism. Its hero must be a member of the proletarian masses. His action is by all means deemed meaningful if it is conducted for the sake of the interest of the masses. Otherwise, it is an obstruction to revolution…. The mission of revolutionary literature is to represent

11


the power of the masses in lives of struggle. It should instill the idea of collectivism in people.

The appeal was supported by many successors. These successors were even more assertive and persistent. By the time of Mao Zedong’s rise to power, Mao launched a large-scale Communist revolution:24

We are utilitarian believers of the proletarian revolution. Our action is based on the present and future interest of the masses that composes 90% of the whole population. We are utilitarian revolutionaries who have the broadest and farthest goal. We are not narrow-minded utilitarian who only seek short-term interest…. Our literature should serve the working class…. Today, any writer who supports the individualist standpoint of petite bourgeoisie cannot possibly serve revolutionary peasants and soldiers.

Henceforth, criticizing individualism became a specific function of revolutionary literature. Writers of revolutionary literature believed that individualism was evil, as it was equivalent to the bourgeoisie, while collectivism was sacred, as it was equivalent to the proletarian.

Guo Moruo was one of the most ardent sympathizers of revolutionary literature. He published “Zhuozi shang de tiaowu” 桌子上的跳舞 (The Dance on the Table) with a pen name, Mai ke’ang, in which he vehemently criticized Chinese writers: “They are just some idle individualist anarchists. What they desire is simply absolute freedom”; their expressions “are extremely narrow-minded. Those are merely narrow descriptions of personal life, trivial lyrical word games.”25 In another essay, “Liusheng jiqi de huiyin” 留聲機器的回音 (The Echoes of the Gramophone), Guo pointed out that “subjective individualists” should overcome their individualism and participate in collective social movements: “They have to become a gramophone—first, you have to express the voice (to acquire the proletarian consciousness); second, you have to give up your own self-consciousness (to overcome your petit bourgeois consciousness); third, you have to take action (to put theory into practice).”26 To put it simply, Guo proposed to eliminate individualism and the expression of the self. Writers should passively become the gramophone of collective consciousness without reservation.

Compared to Zhou Zuoren’s proposition of “human literature,” Guo’s proclamation was obviously a regression. The promotion of revolution extinguished the faint cry for enlightenment emerging during the May Fourth era. Writers were required to write for the sake of revolution. The focus was on revolution rather than literature. All creative initiatives and aims became revolutionary

12


weapons.27 From the above discussion, we can see that after the profuse and rather haphazard development of New Literature in its nascent stage, the dynamic of change was rapidly engulfed by the promotion of revolution. Individualism of literature suffered a severe blow as it was displaced by sociality and collectivism. In revolutionary works that had peasant movements and the life of the lower class as their subject matters, even love narratives were tinged with revolutionary colors. These mainstream works were serious and somber without exception. Revolutionary writers’ critique of literature ranged from the pursuit of pleasure to the pursuit of individualism. The severe attack on literary individualism was harmful to the cultivation of literary perception and inspiration, and the effect for the development of literature was devastating.

The revolutionary trend got worse with the publication of Mao’s “Zai Yan’an wenyi zuotanhui shang de jianghua” 在延安文藝座談會上的講話 (Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art) and Guo Moruo’s “Chi fandong wenyi” 斥反

動文藝 (A Critique on Reactionary Literature and Art) in the 1940s.28 Shao Quanlin summarized the assertion of revolutionary writers:29

Today, as progressive intellectuals, we have to go through consciousness transformation by living with the masses. We should build a healthy and perceptive life on this basis; otherwise we will be caught in the old path of individualist literature. We believe that the chaotic situation that the literary circle faces nowadays is largely due to the replacement of the mass consciousness and collectivist thought by individualist consciousness and thought.

For the whole century, the development of New Literature was loaded with unnecessary responsibilities. Literature was not only treated as the remedy for social sickness, later, it even became the agent for politics, or politics itself. Non-mainstream writers suffered from challenge and condemnation because people were eager to exclude pleasure and enjoyment from literature. The works of these marginal writers did not receive fair judgement and recognition. These writers were regarded as petit bourgeois writers. They were pushed to the peripheries of the literary circle and despised by mainstream writers. In the aforementioned essay, “Chi fandong wenyi,” Guo expressed his contempt toward these writers: “I appeal to innocent writers to cut off their connections with these people. Do not cooperate with them; I will advise my friends not to cooperate with them. Anyone who would like to fold their arms, please stand back, or stand in the shade.”30 The situation continued from the late 1920s to the 1970s; for almost half of the 20th century, New Literature developed in an abnormal environment.

13


New Literature experimented with different literary styles, forms, and subject matters. Since its inception, writers tried to adapt to the uncertain socio-political reality and strived to tackle the crises the Chinese society faced. New Literature has never been “pure” literature, even though many critics and practitioners proposed a kind of “pure” literature in the course of its development. Under such a context, literature maintained a complicated relationship with the ups and downs of society and its politics. Literature’s subject of purpose changed from “literature for life’s sake” and “literature for the masses” to “literature for workers, peasants, and soldiers,” “literature for society,” “literature for the majority,” and “literature for politics.”

Be it consciously or unwittingly, New Literature was caught in an irreversible dilemma that was closely related to the national condition of China. We can compare a poem written in ancient poetic form with a work of New Poetry on the same subject. Lin Xueheng’s “Cheng renliche guoshi” 乘人力車過市 (Riding a Rickshaw through the Town) was recorded in Qian Zhonglian’s Jindai shichao 近代詩

鈔 (An Anthology: Poetry of Recent Years):

A rickshaw puller pulls his rickshaw under the scorching sun.

曳車用人力，奔走烈日下。

With only some strings of cash you can ride a man like riding a horse.

衹此百十錢，乘人如乘馬。

He runs uphill and downhill and sweats so much.

上坡下坡行，汗出動成把。

His back bends and his ankles hurt. 佝僂腰背折，仰竄弊其踝。

Earning for the livelihood of his family, he is unable to make any complaint.

得錢活全家，辛苦較多寡。

Who will pity him when he is scolded by his customers?

坐客時罵叱，誰是哀憐者？

Also a means of transport, cars rush out of high buildings.

同為僕御流，汽車出巨廈。

They travel miles without passengers next to the drivers.

高座旁無人，千里直一瀉。

Gold has changed this world; the gap between the poor and the rich widens.

黃金變茲世，勞逸愈分野。

Workers and peasants will rise, and change all white into red.

終恐起工農，盡使白為赭。

14


Different from the regular form of the above poem, Hu Shi’s poem, “Renli chefu”人

力車夫 (The Rickshaw Puller), published in issue no. 1 of volume 4 of Xin qingnian (新青年 The New Youth), was written in free verse:

“Rickshaw! Rickshaw!” 「車子！車子！」

A rickshaw rushes in front of the passenger.

車來如飛。

The passenger feels sad seeing the puller.

客看車夫，忽然心中酸悲。

He asks the puller, “How old are you? How long have you been pulling the rickshaw?”

客問車夫，「你今年幾歲？

拉車拉了多少時？」

The puller answers, “I am 16. I have been pulling the rickshaw for 3 years. Mister, please don’t be suspicious.”

車夫答客，「今年十六，拉

過三年車了，你老別多疑。

」

The passenger says, “You are too young. I am not going to ride on your rickshaw. That will make me sad.”

客告車夫，「你年紀太小，

我不坐你車。我坐你車，我

心慘淒。」

The puller says, “I have no customer for half of the day. I am cold and hungry. Your sympathy can’t feed my hunger. I am young and I pull the rickshaw, but the police do not care. Why would you care?”

車夫告客，「我半日沒有生

意，我又寒又飢。你老的好

心腸，飽不了我的餓肚皮。

我年紀小拉車，警察都不

管，你老又是誰？」

The passenger nods his head, and says, “Please go to the west of the Ministry of the Interior!”

客人點頭上車，說「拉到內

務部西！」

The poem was published in 1918, one year before the outbreak of the May Fourth Movement, at the eve of the birth of New Literature. From the above two poems, we can see the differences and similarities of recent-style ancient poetry (jinti shi 近體詩) and modern poetry (xiandai shi 現代詩). Their nature is similar but their language and forms are very different. The expression of sympathy toward the weak and poor social class is an excellent part of the tradition of Chinese literature, which was also present in New Literature. In both poems, personal sympathy is expressed as a social critique. Personal feelings and society are not antagonistic

15


to each other. However, an opposition between the two was constructed when revolutionary literature vigorously criticized individualism. By the late 1940s, individualism in literature came to an end as writers held an extreme view that literature should only serve the majority.

The viewpoint was always stressed in solemn and righteous contexts. Mao expounded his view on the reason for proposing revolutionary literature:31

I began life as a student and at school acquired the ways of a student; I then used to feel it undignified to do even a little manual labour, such as carrying my own luggage in the presence of my fellow students, who were incapable of carrying anything, either on their shoulders or in their hands. At that time I felt that intellectuals were the only clean people in the world, while in comparison workers and peasants were dirty.… But after I became a revolutionary and lived with workers and peasants and with soldiers of the revolutionary army, I gradually came to know them well, and they gradually came to know me well too. It was then, and only then, that I fundamentally changed the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois feelings implanted in me in the bourgeois schools. I came to feel that compared with the workers and peasants the unremoulded intellectuals were not clean and that, in the last analysis, the workers and peasants were the cleanest people and, even though their hands were soiled and their feet smeared with cow-dung, they were really cleaner than the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois intellectuals.

And he continued:32

That is what is meant by a change in feelings, a change from one class to another. If our writers and artists who come from the intelligentsia want their works to be well received by the masses, they must change and remould their thinking and their feelings. Without such a change, without such remoulding, they can do nothing well and will be misfits.

The promotion of revolutionary literature firstly appealed to sympathetic feelings, which was then transmuted into a moral responsibility. Worker-peasant-soldier literature in New Literature was a derivative of revolutionary literature. Both were products of the Chinese society during a time when the Communist Party’s influence widened. The concern for the masses and collectivism and the critique of individualism discussed above were further promoted after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China under strengthened executive power and

16


authoritative interpretation. Zhou Yang, a major literary theorist of Communist China and a supporter of Mao, wrote:33

Chinese people have become highly aware and organized in politics as they have strived for making changes for more than 20 years under the guidance of the Communist Party of China. As our people are participating in important activities that will determine the destiny of China, if we do not try our best to get close to them and describe them but just stay in the narrow intellectual circle, we will be left behind by the masses. More seriously, we will go against the reality of history and the principle of realism.

Continuous criticism against individualism and praises for collectivism that stressed the importance of the majority adversely affected the development of literature. New Literature suffered deadly pressure from politics alongside with the heavy social responsibility that was already imposed upon it. The damage was even more severe than before because while social responsibility only limited the function of literature, the political critique of individualism was a total denial of the basic principle of literary creation. In fact, if literature is deprived of personal experience and reflection, individual artistic talent, and the linguistic abilities and creativity of individual writers, what would be left in literary works?

As the author, a writer holds the scepter for his own composition. He should only be directed by his own thoughts and feelings and refuse any external order. Any writer who subordinates himself to external power will brought negative influence to literature. It should be up to the self-awareness of writers to attend to the ups and downs of society and the happiness and sorrow of the people. Moreover, emphasizing the sociality of literature and literature’s representation of the masses should not be antagonistic to the principle of individual composition of literature. It is erroneous to denial the individuality of literary production for the sake of promoting a literature for the masses. Similarly, we should not conceive that stressing personal feelings and perception of literature run against literature’s social responsibility.

Chinese writers were plunged into a dilemma under the increasingly harsh writing environment. On the one hand, the self-consciousness of writers was still the impetus and source of inspiration of creative composition, but almost all writers were meticulously careful in reining his individuality so as to avoid any slight expression of petit bourgeois thought or emotion. They had a strong sense of the original sin of being an intellectual. On the other hand, writers were restrained by political orders and compulsory composition. They were required to waste their energy on composing stories whose characters were unfamiliar to them. They

17


received numerous orders on what to write. For example, in the 1950s, writers were required to represent “new active characters” (xinde jiji renwu 新的積極人物) in their stories;34 later, they were asked to criticize “people in the middle” (zhongjian renwu 中間人物). By the Cultural Revolution, these political orders became more sophisticated and detailed, for example, “the three prominences” (san tuchu 三突出) and “the three contrasts” (san peichen 三陪襯) were designed to regulate characterization.35 In short, writers were forced to forsake what they were familiar with and adapt to what was strange to them. They must comply with the more and more detailed and strict orders in their compositions.

The condition of literature discussed above was formed in a long and continuous process. Writers were led into such a condition gradually and continuously. Almost all writers (with a few exceptions) were unable to adapt to such a situation. They were required to ceaselessly remold themselves and undergo self-criticism. The subject of self-criticism was the so-called individualism. In the 1960s, an anxious atmosphere permeated the whole literary circle. Zhang Tianyi expressed his hesitation: “A writer considers himself speaking from the standpoint of the working masses and writes for them. Has he succeeded in doing so? To what extend has he succeeded? If he fails or has not done enough, or if he thinks he has fulfilled the task but in fact he hasn’t, is there any subjective reason for this despite the political environment?”36 Ba Jin also denounced his past writings: “I said long time ago I had not written anything praiseworthy. When I spare some time to reread when I have written in the past 23 years, I feel ashamed of myself. The era moves forward but I am slow to catch up with its pace. My past works seem so weak and colorless in front of such a great era!”37

Reviewing the path that New Literature took in the 20th century, its twists and turns are thought-provoking. Although New Literature suffered a lot, its achievement should not be underrated. Generations of talented writers produced batches of excellent works and accumulated abundant experiences. However, New Literature has not grown into a mature form. This might sound dispiriting but it is the reality. This is because New Literature is still unable to find a proper position regarding some fundamental issues such as its perspectives on tradition and the modern, the social and the individual, politics and art, and thought and aesthetics. New Literature was subjected to its social and political environment and suffered from unstable social condition for a long time. Because of the instability, writers who made significant achievements during the May Fourth era lost their creative energy in later years. After the 1950s, Mao Dun, Guo Moruo, Ba Jin, and Cao Yu had not written any work that was comparable to Ziye 子夜 (Midnight) ,38 “Nüshen”, Jia 家 (The Family), and Richu. Lao She’s Chaguan 茶館 (The Tea House) was just barely satisfactory. The past glory is impossible to recreate after the May Fourth

18


period.The cause for this decline was the unduly high expectation of politics on

literature. Because of the high expectation, literature was forced to change from progressive to radical. As literature was used to serve political purposes, it was bogged down by politics—such setback was fatal. Literature had its effects on society and life, but it was definitely erroneous to entrust literature the heavy responsibility of resuscitating the country. Although literature can influence society and life, its effects are far from immediate; there is always a process of reception and assimilation.

Ever since its inception, New Literature was devoted to reforming the ideas and content of Chinese literature. For promoting Chinese verse written in vernacular Chinese, poets placed excessive emphasis on vernacular language but neglected the poetic aspect. For New Literature, it was not uncommon that writers pursued newness at the expense of literariness. Since writers were eager to use literature to change society and the spirit of Chinese people, the focus of New Literature was on the ideas and content of literature from the beginning. This phenomenon continued until the end of the Cultural Revolution. The ideas in a literary work were considered more important that the art of literature. Literature was regarded as a vehicle for promoting revolution instead of an art proper.

In his “Talks at the Yan’an Forum” published in the 1940s, Mao unequivocally proposed that “each and every class always puts the political standard in the first place and the artistic standard in the second.”39 However, the artistic value of literature should always be the most important. Any other aspect that is related to literature, be it politics or ideology, can only attain their meaning and value through the artistic nature of literature. Literature loses its qualification as an art once it prioritizes other issues higher than its artistic quality. For a long time, this basic concept was distorted and misconstrued. The reality of modern Chinese literature manifested how politics violated literature and how ideas invaded aesthetics. It was considered justified to forsake lyrical expression and art for revolution and ideas.

New Literature strived for its reasonable survival in the long history of its development. It faced difficult choices in the process of its formation. Contradictions and oppositions hindered it from becoming mature. By the late 20th century, the condition of New Literature underwent a fundamental change. Politics finally loosened its long-term grip on literature. The closed society of China proceeded to open itself to the world. The planned economy also gradually transformed into market economy. Authoritative control of freedom of speech became less strict, freeing literature from its past shackles. The changes underwent in these decades was unprecedented.

19


Since the late 19th century, the development of China’s New Literature experienced radical changes all the way through to the 21st century. Its vicissitude has been closely connected to the vicissitude of the Chinese society. At the turn of the 20th century, Chinese writers dreamt of a stronger nation and better society as they experienced the replacement of the traditional by the modern, followed by disastrous political oppression on literature. For a very long time (e.g. during the Cultural Revolution), literature was deprived of its spirit under such oppression. Although the political heaviness was imposed by external forces, writers themselves were also responsible for it.

Entering the 21st century, New Literature gains new space for its development with the advent of a new era. However, literature also needs to face new problems. As political restrictions on literary creation have been lifted, writers can enjoy incomparable freedom and the profits brought by the market economy. The freedom that Chinese writers enjoy nowadays, despite some basic limitations, has been dreamt of by generations of Chinese writers.

The first turning point appeared by the end of the 1970s. As the Cultural Revolution came to an end, the social environment of China was improved. Another wave of thought emancipation took place after the first thought emancipation of the May Fourth Movement, promoting the thought emancipation of literature and art. New Literature entered a brand new stage, but the “newness” here has a different meaning from that of the May Fourth Movement. It can be understood as a renewed recognition of the status and value of literature. The new era of literature allows for readjustments of the relationships between literature and politics, literature and the masses, and literature and society. These adjustments aim at releasing literature from its inferior position to politics. The process is slow and difficult, but the meaning is immense.

Literary works composed in this process, such as Liu Xinwu’s “Ban zhuren” 班主任 (The Class Teacher) and Lu Xinhua’s “Shanghen” 傷痕 (The Scar), still showed aftermaths of literature’s service to politics. Writers were still more concerned with the content than the artistic style. However, there were also works that represented the return from politics to art and from society to the individual, such as Zhang Jie’s “Aishi buneng wangji de” 愛是不能忘記的 (Love Must Not be Forgotten) and “Jian maisui” 揀麥穗 (Picking Wheat). Writers were finally allowed to write on subject matters that they are interested in and familiar with.

After the short literary carnival of the 1980s, Chinese literature confronts serious problems in its development. The focus of literature becomes obfuscated by the emphasis of pleasure and entertainment. Writers are aware of the lack of substance in contemporary literary composition. Superficiality and lack of emotions become prevalent in Chinese literature. The lightness of literature is a

20


worrying phenomenon that even makes people feel reminiscent for previous times. A prominent part of literature has become a profitmaking enterprise. It bears no responsibility for society and readers. The new challenge for literature is the overflow of commercial desire which we inevitable face after breaking free from the yoke of politics.

Part IPart. I

The Historical Destiny of Chinese Literature

22


China’s One Hundred Years of Anxiety and DreamThe revolution that Chinese literature experienced in the modern era was closely related to its social environment. The literary movements that took place in modern China were ignited by social causes. The fuse of the waves of literary movements was the decline of the Qing Empire. A sense of survival crisis pervaded the Chinese society as people witnessed the disastrous defeats of the Qing government. Since the middle 19th century, Chinese literati engaged in promoting reforms through literature and sought ways to save the nation.

It takes a long time for a traditional society to forgo old beliefs and customs, especially in China, old traditions had accumulated throughout the thousands of years of history. The social reality imposed great impedance on literary reform. The abolition of backward and conservative social practices and beliefs required a long time for thought reform and social moot.

About 250 years ago, the reign of Qianlong was an era of prosperity for China during the Qing dynasty. In the 58th year of Qianlong (1793), the British Empire appointed George Macartney the first envoy of Britain to China. His embassy travelled to China in August and arrived at Guangdong in October. At that time, the Qing dynasty still regarded itself the “Celestial Empire” (tianchao 天朝) and believed that the embassy came to pay tribute to the emperor. After reading the embassy’s letter to the throne and the report submitted by Guo Shixun, the grand coordinator and provincial governor (xunfu 巡撫) of Guangdong, Qianlong agreed to receive the embassy because the wording used in the letter was polite and sincere. After the embassy arrived in Beijing, numerous memorials to the throne were submitted to Qianlong. The emperor meticulously studied the memorials, and was especially careful with the details of rites. Among the memorials and edicts that Qianlong and his officials communicated was an edict that Qianlong wrote to Liang Kentang, the Viceroy of Zhili (zhili zongdu 直隸總督) of the time, punctiliously questioning details of the embassy’s tributes and decorum requirements at the court:1

According to a previous memorial to the throne by Liang Kentang, at the announcement of the imperial edict in the first meeting with the ambassador, the ambassador would take off his hat and stand strict, so why it becomes taking off his hat and kowtow in this memorial? I have heard that Westerners wrapped their legs with cloth, so it is not convenient for them to bend their

23


knees, and it is not their custom to perform the rite of kowtow. They will only take off their hats and nod. It might happen that the viceroy was not clear about this, so he mentioned kowtow in his memorial. I hereby instruct that: if the ambassador does not kowtow in the welcoming banquet but just take his hat off and nod, our official has to mention to him in a casual way, that ambassadors of other vassal states who come to pay tribute to the Celestial Empire usually perform the rite of three kneelings and nine kowtows; even their kings have to perform the same rite if they come themselves. Now as you are sent by the British court to bring birthday regards to the Emperor, you should comply with the law of the Celestial Empire. Although your legs are wrapped by cloth, you can unwrap it so as to perform the rite and wrap it on again afterwards. If you stick to your own custom and refuse to perform the rite, you fail to manifest the sincerity that is originally intended to express to our Emperor even though you have travelled such a long way here. You will become the laughing stock for other ambassadors, and even the Minister of Rites in court will not allow that. I mention this for your own good. After such tactful teaching, the ambassador should know how to respect the rites of the Celestial Empire.

This passage only concerned with trivial matters. It reflected the awkwardness of the closed feudal empire when facing the changing global order. The empire had lost its magnanimity in contrived interactions with the world. The cautiousness and triviality revealed in the passage foreshadowed the impending decline of the empire. Unaware of its own ignorance, the conservative empire tried to maintain its pride with lies and vanity. Four days after the issuance of the above edict, another edict to Zheng Rui, the Minister of Salt of Changlu, quoted Zheng Rui’s memorial to the throne: “[the ambassador] felt deeply ashamed for not being familiar with the rites of the Celestial Empire. He spent a few days to learn how to kneel and kowtow properly.… His respect to the Celestial Empire is sincere. He dares not to perform the rites carelessly and risk being accused of lacking in respect.”2

The Qing Empire was able to maintain its pride since it was still in its prime time, even though its attachment to old customs already appeared backward and laughable as the Western world was entering the industrial modern era. Thereafter, the power of the Qing dynasty weakened gradually and the empire was defeated disgracefully in several humiliating wars. Despite the changing history, it took a very long time to get rid of the old custom of forcing foreign ambassadors to perform the rite of three kneelings and nine kowtows. By the January of 1891, it was recorded that Guangxu met ambassadors in the Hall of Purple Light (Ziguang ge 紫光閣). Every ambassador submitted their letters of credence to the emperor. They

24


bowed to show their courtesy. Henceforth the rite for ambassadors was set. This was already about 100 years after the incident of the British embassy in Qianlong’s time. In traditional China, even a trivial old custom required such a long time and tremendous effort to change. The strong grip of tradition was a strong impeding force for modern China’s literary revolution to overcome.

The feudal culture of China stubbornly maintained itself. It regarded the empire of old China as the center of the world and required other countries and states to unite under it. However, the Qing Empire was too weak to maintain its cultural self-centeredness. The economic and military strength of the great powers of the world represented by their cannons and warships destroyed the declining empire’s assertion of its cultural superiority utterly. The changes in traditional rites that took place during Guangxu’s time were only an inevitable submission to reality.

In the late 19th century, successive humiliating defeats attracted concerns from Chinese intellectuals. Kang Youwei wrote a memorial to the throne in 1888 to plead for the emperor to change fixed laws, listen to ministers’ advices, and beware of opposing political forces against national reform. However, the plea did not succeed. In the next year, Guangxu attended to the administration of national matters himself. In 1891, Kang published Da tong shu 大同書 (The Book of Great Unity) and wrote Xinxue weijing kao 新學偽經考 (A New Study on Investigating the Authenticity of the Classics). By 1895, Liugong Island was occupied by the Japanese. The Beiyang Fleet (beiyang shuishi 北洋水師) was completely defeated and its military commander, Ding Ruchang, committed suicide. The empire’s emergency provoked anxiety among patriots.

In the January of 1898, Kang Youwei wrote to the throne for the fifth time. Guangxu then sought political reform with his ministers and allowed them to conduct reformative activities. In May, the imperial censor, Pan Qinglan, impeached Kang for amassing his own supporters inappropriately. On the 29th of May, Kang wrote to the throne for the sixth time to propose to the emperor and suggested to set new policies with the collective effort of all ministers by setting up a policy advisory bureau to collect opinions and a reformation bureau to remake laws and policies. On the 11th of June, Guangxu promulgated an imperial edict to initiate a national reform by announcing new national policies. On the 21st of September, Empress Dowager Cixi launched a coup d’état and resumed her role of regent. She imprisoned Guangxu, and the reformists were listed as wanted. While Kang fled and went on an exile, the “Six Gentlemen” were killed, putting an end to the Hundred Days’ Reform (bairi weixin 百日維新). The decade from the promotion of reform by Kang Youwei in 1888 to Cixi’s launch of her coup d’état in 1898 witnessed the history of the unsuccessful reform that took place during the fin de siècle.

Since then China was caught in ceaseless wars and political turmoil. Chinese

25


intellectuals never stopped their pursuit and fight for changes. However, it is indisputable that the Chinese society was becoming increasingly chaotic and the prosperity during the reign of Kangxi and Qianlong had gone forever. The pursuit of Chinese intellectuals initiated a whole century’s quest for national modernization.

26


The General Context for the Revolution of Thought and Culture in Modern ChinaIn 1919, the Paris Peace Conference was held after the First World War. Although China belonged to the Allied victors, the Western powers declined the Chinese delegates’ requests for having Germany’s concessions on Shandong returned and putting an end to imperialist privileges in China. The German concessions were even transferred to Japan. The Chinese were infuriated by the failed diplomacy. On the 4th of May, university students led by the Peking University participated in a demonstration and marched to the front of Tiananmen. They demanded the Chinese government to “Struggle for sovereignty externally, [and] get rid of the national traitors at home.” (外爭國權，內懲國賊。) 32 students were arrested. On the 6th of May, the Premier of the State Council, Qian Nengxun, convened an emergency meeting. It was proposed that the Peking University had to be dismissed, which was strongly opposed by the Minister of Education, Fu Zengxiang, and he resigned from the position out of anger.

Chinese intellectuals’ disappointment toward the corruption of the government brought a thorough reflection on the corruption of the Chinese society. The May Fourth Movement provided an opportunity for the country’s yearn for reform to turn into a large-scale cultural movement against imperialism and feudalism. The import of scientific and democratic thoughts, the promotion of national enlightenment, and the literary revolution that changed the old literary institution were all extensions of the Hundred Days’ Reform that took place during the late 19th century.

The May Fourth Movement and the Revolution of New Literature were actions called forth by the outcry of the awakened intellectuals in front of Tiananmen. They were no incidental occurrences. Many pioneers were aware of the necessity to end the long history of the ancient Chinese empire and criticize the tradition of feudalism for the country to enter the modern world. For this purpose, science should be promoted to oppose backwardness; democracy should replace monarchical autocracy. From the 19th century to the 20th century, Chinese intellectuals sought remedial solutions to the political and social difficulties that China faced. This pursuit was the general cause for the socio-political and cultural movements that took place in the 20th century. These movements and their consequences influenced

27


all aspects of the Chinese society and the mentality of all Chinese people.The pioneers of the Revolution of New Literature and the New Culture

Movement showed their awareness of the urgency to promote progressive ideas when confronted by the national hardship. In 1915, Xin qingnian, an influential magazine that induced the May Fourth Movement, was founded. In the founding issue of the magazine, six principles for young people were proposed:3

1. Self-assertive instead of submissive 2. Progressive instead of conservative 3. Proactive instead of reclusive 4. Global instead of closed 5. Practical instead of empty 6. Scientific instead of imaginary

1. 自立的而非奴隸的

2. 進步的而非保守的

3. 進取的而非退隱的

4. 世界的而非鎖國的

5. 實利的而非虛文的

6. 科學的而非想像的

The call for the pursuit of science, democracy, progress, and openness expressed in these six principles still resounds today with its original vigor. The manifesto that Xin qingnian published in 1919 advocated more unyieldingly a rebellious spirit against traditional values and concepts:4

To seek social progress, we must undermine traditionally set ideas that have been taken for granted. We are determined to forsake old beliefs and create new ideas for politics, morality, and economy ourselves, based on the ideas of previous and contemporary intellectuals. We strive to establish a new spirit of the age and adapt to new social environment.

While pronouncing a complete break with the old and conservative mentality of traditional China, these revolutionists upheld an independent and creative spirit, driven by the promotion of democratic thoughts during the May Fourth Movement.

Cai Yuanpei was one of the proponents of the New Culture and May Fourth Movements. In his general preface to Zhongguo xin wenxue daxi 中國新文學大

系 (Compendium of China’s New Literature), Cai revealed the anxious mind of Chinese intellectuals witnessing the nation’s crisis. He pointed out that more than

28


300 years had passed since the Renaissance for Europe to reach a stage of cultural prosperity, in which the creative light of talents of all fields shone forth. China’s situation was exceptionally urgent because it was still in the grip of tradition: “We have to work extremely hard in decades to catch up with the centuries of progress in Europe,” because “our history and the modern condition urge us to stride and rush forward.”5 The preface was published more than a decade after the May Fourth Movement, and Cai believed that the development of New Literature was still far from its maturity: “[New Literature’s] influence on scientific spirit, democratic thought, and artistic works that represents individual styles is still going on…. I wish that in the second or third decade, China will have its own Raphael and Shakespeare.”6

This was an ideal full of romantic spirit. We can see in the anxious aspiration of the May Fourth generation of intellectuals a similar disposition as that of Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao’s generation of intellectuals. They once and again wished that their time was only a transitional period that prepared for the advent of a genuinely modern China, but they were in fact caught in immense historical waves of change. The progress of China constantly oscillated between anticipation and disappointment.

We can regard the New Literature Movement as countless times of struggle and prolonged waiting. Although literature only had a minor position in the mind of the Chinese and the authority, writers saw it as a great enterprise to save the nation and society. Generations of intellectuals devoted their lives and souls to the project for decades. In the second half of the century, they were even drawn into the disastrous Cultural Revolution.

The New Literature Movement was a derivative of the May Fourth Movement, but we can also say that it was an in-depth outcome of the New Culture Movement. Thoughts of saving the nation propelled progressive Chinese thinkers to seek methods to enlighten the masses, and for this purpose, literature had to be transformed for performing educational functions. We can say that the occurrence of the Chinese literary revolution was not for the sake of literature but for breaking the feudal shackles of the traditional society.

Hu Shi mentioned Wang Zhao, a less known political figure, when he wrote on the necessity of using vernacular language for New Literature. The thought and action of Wang Zhao exemplified a spiritual unity that ran through the political struggle, thought reformation, and literary revolution from the Hundred Days’ Reform to the May Fourth Movement. Wang Zhao participated in the Hundred Days’ Reform as one of the leaders. After the failure of the reform, he went on exile to Japan since he was listed as wanted by the court. After 1900, Wang Zhao sneaked back to China in disguise and lived a secluded life in Tianjin. His thought

29


underwent a tremendous change after his return. He awoke from his fantasy of strengthening the nation through strategic means and realized that the aim could only be achieved by educating the masses. The foundation for building a wealthy nation and governing it concerned the masses instead of the elites. Therefore, he invented mandarin alphabets to promote mass literacy. Hu Shi considered this the preceding project to the vernacular language movement. Hu Shi wrote: “There were a group of insightful people endeavored to awake the masses that comprised the majority of society to bear the urgent responsibility of saving the nation. They believed that the masses must be educated, but the ancient written language could not serve the purpose.”7

Many promoters of New Literature Movement started out with an eagerness in saving the nation through science, but they later recognized that the backwardness of society and the foolishness of the masses had to be enlightened through literature. Saving the nation was assimilated with a nation-wide project of enlightenment. From the example of Wang Zhao, we can see that the realization of the Hundred Days’ reformists found its descendant in the promotion of using vernacular language in literature in New Literature Movement.

The New Literature, New Culture, and May Fourth Movements were remedial effort launched to change China’s politics and society, as well as the mentality of the masses. However, this also brought potential contradictions among the intellectuals’ aspirations of saving the nation, enlightening the people, and promoting individual creativity of art. New Literature was destined to face great disorder in its later development because of these contradictions.

30


The Hardship at the Turn of the Century as the Basic Cause for the Rise of New LiteratureIn the “Note” to the fiction section of Riben shumu zhi 日本書目志 (Records of Japanese Books) that Kang Youwei edited in 1897, he highly praised literature for its function of cultivation: “Whatever can’t be preached in the six classics should be preached in fiction; whatever can’t be included in the regular history should be included in fiction; whatever can’t be instructed in aphorisms should be instructed in fiction; whatever can’t be governed through the law should be governed through fiction.”8 The fiction revolution that took place at the end of the 19th century set out to promote fiction as a means to cultivate people. Liang Qichao pointed out in “Lun xiaoshuo yu qunzhi zhi guanxi” 論小說與群治之關係 (On the Relationship between Fiction and Social Governance): “To achieve better mass governance we should begin with revolutionizing fiction; to renew the mindset of people we should begin with producing new fiction.”9 He believed that to change religion, custom, craftsmanship, and the human mind, launching a fiction revolution was a necessary step, because “fiction has an unnamable power to influence people.”10

Besides the promotion of content reform to enlighten people, the fiction and poetry revolutions at that time also attended to the advantage of using vernacular language in literature for mass education. In Qiu Tingliang’s article titled “Lun baihua wei weixin zhi ben” 論白話為維新之本 (On Vernacular Chinese as the Foundation for Our Reform) published in Wuxi baihua bao 無錫白話報 (Wuxi Vernacular Language Daily) in 1901, the stand of upholding the importance of the vernacular Chinese in written texts was clearly stated: “The literary Chinese is the tool that keeps the nation ignorant; the vernacular Chinese is the tool to enlighten the nation.”11

Promoters of New Literature were sympathizers of their predecessors. They had the same emphasis on the social reform function of literature and passion for promoting the use of vernacular Chinese in written works. Cai Yuanpei pointed out that thought reform had transformed into literature reform because “literature was the tool for transmitting thoughts.”12 Intellectuals such as Qian Xuantong were skeptical towards old literature and launched sharp criticism of it. In Qian’s

31


letter to Chen Duxiu in 1918, he wrote: “Writers of old literature began to talk nonsense soon after you read through half of the page. Young people who read these writings would be attracted to its rhythmic language and unwittingly accept its absurd reasoning.”13

May Fourth Movement inherited directly the idealistic spirit from the pioneers. At the turn of the 20th century, China experienced at least two times of disastrous disillusionment: the revengeful reaction against the Hundred Years’ Reform and cruel repression after its failure and the return of feudalistic power in the chaotic warlordism after the Xinhai Revolution. The two tragic events compelled people to recognize the strength of traditional forces which would take every opportunity to demonstrate its power. However, the participants of the May Fourth Movement never lost their passion for their project of saving the nation through literature.

The May Fourth Movement as another ardent attempt to seek a way out for the sick nation still left us with a strong impression of its youthful passion. The humiliating result of the Paris Peace Conference was only the trigger that provoked the accumulated sense of national indignation in Chinese people. It acted as a turning point as the injured national pride motivated people to reflect on China’s long feudal history. May Fourth supporters criticized traditional values and feudalism and proposed to undermine Confucianism. The import of concepts such as science and democracy showed their recognition of the modern civilization. Literature produced during the time was based on the purpose of awaking the Chinese people from their backward mentality and enlightening them with modern ideas in order to remold their spirit.

The design and establishment of New Literature became the test ground and point of breaking through for an all-round opposition to the old order of the traditional society. New Literature became a forerunner for China’s New Culture Movement. The spirit of criticism was the premise and foundation for the movement. May Fourth intellectuals’ absolute skepticism of the old order and their rebellious spirit against tradition constituted the essence of the new paradigm of thought. Since the movement developed along the same tragic mood of the late 19th century, the nation’s suffering became the soul of New Literature established in the 20th century. Chinese intellectuals’ anxious dream of saving the nation and the sublime sense of enlightenment jointly formed the solemn atmosphere of the spirit of New Literature. Profound skepticism, serious reflections, anguish outcry, and determined opposition constituted the pathos of New Literature.

Because the movement was influenced by Western concepts of individual emancipation and democracy, it was infused with a temperament of the free human spirit. Early mature works of New Literature usually showed a rebellious spirit embodied by an image of madness. For example, a true picture of society

32


was conveyed through the language of a madman in Lu Xun’s “kuangren riji”; the language used in Guo Moruo’s “Fenghuang niepan” 鳳凰涅槃 (Phoenix Nirvana) and “Tiangou” 天狗 (The Heaven Dog) was bold and unrestrained. They expressed the spirit of the time through abnormality. The literature of the whole era was rarely bright or peaceful.

Even for the “lake poets” who were famous for their love poetry, their works were infused with an anguish atmosphere of rebellion, sacrifice, and struggle. Love in the era of national suffering was not a youthful privilege and enjoyment but an arena for demonstrating the mission of struggle. Feeling would have to be sacrificed as the cost of the new generation’s struggle against social restraints. There was no youthful passion and sweetness of love portrayed in Ba Jin’s Jia, instead, the novel was infiltrated with antagonism, hatred, wrath, and death. Even in Zhu Ziqing’s lyrical essay, “Beiying” 背影 (Silhouette), the scene of the father crossing the rail track and climbed up the platform was an eternal shot of the son’s lament for the suffering of the old generation. “Beiying” showed a strong sense of humane sympathy, its mourning for the oldness that the Chinese society imposed upon past generations was as heavy as the sorrow depicted in other contemporary writings of its time.

The history of China’s New Literature began with this solemn social atmosphere and Chinese intellectuals’ sense of mission. The declaration published in Xin qingnian in 1919 first and foremost upheld the spirit of skepticism and rebellion. The magazine’s supporters believed that they had to undermine prejudices that were taken for granted for long in the traditional society and forsook old concepts in order to create new thoughts to “establish the spirit of the time and adapt to new social environment.”14 To tackle the long-term suffering of the Chinese society, Xin qingnian proposed an idealistic blueprint for China’s future: “Our ideal new era and new society should be honest, progressive, active, free, hardworking, and happy. Our society will live in felicity, while hypocritical, conservative, negative, and restraining things […] will diminish and disappear in the end.”15 The declaration put together beautiful adjectives to describe the intellectuals’ vision of the future, which became the goal of pursuit for New Literature.

Xin qingnian announced its antagonistic spirit against old traditional forces in a romantic tone. It asserted in its response to the accusations launched by conservative parties in society:16

What they accuse us was nothing more than damaging Confucianism, rites and disciplines, the essence of the Chinese culture, chastity, traditional ethics (loyalty, filial piety, and integrity), old art (Chinese drama), religion (beliefs in ghosts and gods), old literature, and old politics (the privileged

33


class and the rule of man). As a matter of fact, we agree with all these accusations. However, we are not guilty if the cause for subverting all these is to be examined. We committed these “crimes” because we support Mr. Democracy and Mr. Science. If we have to advocate democracy, we have to undermine Confucianism, rites and disciplines, chastity, old ethics, and old politics; if we have to advocate science, we have to reject the essence of Chinese literature and old literature.

This represented the attitude of the intellectuals in criticizing all old and traditional things and values. It also reflected the romantic spirit of New Literature, as it longed for overthrowing the old and establishing the new. The intellectuals were not concerned with to what extent they could achieve their goals but they were determined with their pursuit.

The new situation was indeed a predicament for the Chinese intellectuals. While it was hard for them to overthrow the reign of traditional culture and spirit in just one movement, they were also unclear about what exactly they yearned for as they did not even have the time to understand the condition of the nation thoroughly. However, because the social suffering and nation’s decline were so severe, they were forced to commit to the difficult struggle without full preparation. They generally had an anxious inclination towards success and wished to catch up with the modernizing pace of the world effectively. They aspired to shorten the distance between China and the Western world as fast as possible.

Cai Yuanpei’s call “to catch up with the centuries of progress in Europe” within “decades” I mentioned in the previous section would serve as an example for the Chinese intellectuals’ anxiety. Cai was not alone, for Zheng Boqi also wrote in his preface to the fiction part of Zhongguo xin wenxue daxi that, although new literary trend appeared in our backward country, the progress of literature of advanced countries still has to be repeated. However, the repeated process would be a quick one: “the speed and the degree of backwardness should be inversely proportional. The more backward a country, the faster the progress of its literature.… In reviewing the short decade just passed, we can see that the history of Europe’s two centuries has quickly repeated in the progress of the Chinese literature.… Chinese literature experienced all the literary trends that took place in Western Europe in two centuries randomly and discriminately.”17 Liu Bannong expressed his feeling for the May Fourth Movement in his preface to Xinbian baihua shigao 新編白話詩

稿 (New Edition of an Anthology of Vernacular Verse) that only within 15 years, the generation was “compressed into three generations,” what was new already became old in a very short time.

The scenario was repeated again half a century after the May Fourth Movement,

34


in the decade of literature’s opening up. The politics of this decade was relatively lenient as dogmatic social restraints were loosened, leading to a freer condition for Chinese people. Under such an environment, people felt acutely the huge distance between the backwardness of the closed society and the world around, fostering a prevalent sense of anxiety in literature. Behind the carnival-like exhibition of a variety of literary styles and claims was a sense of loss and deep sorrow.

The sense of humiliation in reality was channeled into the energy of the creative realm as a psychological balance. This phenomenon was present in the social and cultural realms in the 1990s but was the most prominent in literature. New generations of poetry cropped up fast after the trend of Misty Poetry (menglong shi 朦朧詩). The so-called third or the fourth generation of poets and critics, and the so-called fifth generation of film directors and painters were replaced by new generations quickly. Previous pioneers were considered conservative antecessors soon; and they even became subjects to be overthrown. Intellectuals, writers, and artists endlessly chased after newness in artistic creations. Chinese writers’ urge to leave the history of the nation’s suffering behind and their keen pursuit of the stimulation of newness had led to superficiality and fickleness in the development of Chinese literature.

35


The Status of Language in Modern China’s Thought RevolutionBeing dominated by the ideology of saving the nation through literature, Chinese writers devoted themselves to literary revolution wholeheartedly. From the outset, New Literature engaged in the prevalent trend of confronting the old order and creating new order. One of the spiritual pillars of the literary movement, Hu Shi, distinguished two aspects of the New Literature Movement: “human literature” and “living literature.” The two aspects precisely and concisely summarized the spirit of New Literature.

The focus of “living literature” was on revolutionizing language–the vehicle for literary expression. The use of vernacular language, a form of normalized Chinese that was closer to the oral language people usually used daily, in literature instead of classical literary Chinese, which was distant from the masses and social reality, was promoted. The value and achievement of the promotion of vernacular language and its triumph over classical literary Chinese were gradually recognized by people. For a long time, the promotion of vernacular language was considered by some critics a formalist fallacy, but the view had been proven wrong.

The promotion of the use of vernacular language in literature was an unprecedentedly important event. Literature acquired a completely new prospect thanks to the linguistic revolution. The foundation for the development of New Literature had thus been set. The defects of classical literary Chinese were self-evident for the pioneers of May Fourth Movement. Hu Shi believed that classical literary Chinese was a great hindering force for the progress of society. Classical literary Chinese was used in the large amount of social criticism, translations of foreign academic works, and translations of foreign novels produced at that time. New thoughts and concepts could not be properly explained and referred to in classical literary Chinese. Smooth communication was impossible.

Hu Shi once quoted Yan Fu’s self-defense in his explanatory note to his translation of John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty, Qunji quanjie lun 群己權界論: “Readers of my translations always think the writings are too difficult to understand, but they don’t know that the original books are much more difficult. The concepts are themselves difficult and the trouble to understand them has nothing to do with my language.”18 Hu Shi heard in Yan Fu’s defense the death toll of classical literary

36


Chinese. It must be brought to an end if Chinese intellectuals wished to express the complicated discourse of modern new thoughts. Classical literary Chinese betrayed its communicative awkwardness when confronted by modern science, culture, and academic writings. Yan Fu’s competence of classical literary Chinese was widely recognized, his belief that the difficulty in comprehending the translations was not because of his ability in conveying the content in fact reflected the ineffectiveness of classical literary Chinese itself.

The promotion of “living literature” decisively announced a break from traditional means of communication and modes of thinking. The context for the break was the general skepticism of Chinese intellectuals towards the feudal cultural system. New generations of Chinese intellectuals realized that reforming the literary form was necessary for undermining superstitious thinking and achieving thought emancipation. Feudal mentality had to be extinguished through changing the means of communication.

The Chinese intellectuals were aware that they lived in an open global environment. They could not tolerate old and backward thoughts and concepts continue to rage the country. Their most radical slogans were “No fathers, no emperors, no laws, no heaven” (無父無君無法無天) and “cast out Confucianism” (排孔). They believed that the intoxication of the country by Confucianism was so deep that only radical opposition could bring a new life to the country. Because of this recognition, the stand of Chinese intellectuals such as Chen Duxiu took regarding the promotion of vernacular language was so stern that they did not allow disagreement. This also showed a sense of bold disposition that was rarely seen in traditional Chinese intellectuals, as new intellectuals utterly denounced and rebelled against the tradition. Their project was indeed a revolution which undermined feudal mentality’s grip on the spirit and thought of the Chinese. Vernacular language played an important role in destabilizing feudal mentality. People were provided with a new choice of language system and released from the sovereignty of classical literary Chinese.

When poetry written in vernacular Chinese appeared, it quickly took over the dominance of traditional poetry. Poets were free to write and read New Poetry and eliminate the formal restrictions of old poetry. When vernacular language becomes a new means of communication, things written in classical literary Chinese gradually became antiques that belonged to the past. The trend not only revolutionized literature but also official document writings. The influence of imperial examination as well steadily faded out in society.

The establishment of the status of the vernacular language led to a break from traditional ways of thinking. Innovative and revolutionizing means made the expression of new ideas and ways of thinking possible. This also implied the

37


establishment of new ideas and thoughts. Established in the May Fourth era, a time for thought emancipation, New Literature was completely different from the old literature that dominated Chinese culture for thousands of years. The replacement of classical literary Chinese by vernacular Chinese was a great success. We can see that it was a revolution on two levels: literary form and communicative means. In terms of content, what made New Literature different from ancient Chinese literature was the promotion of “human literature,” which was equally revolutionary.

The opposition of “human literature” was “the literature that eats people.” There were two connotations: first, the content of old literature embodied the normative non-human conquer and ruling over people in society. Second, the suffocating pressure on personal nature and liveliness exerted by old literature turned people into non-human. Chinese people were released from the sovereignty of religion and the imperial court. The recognition of the self as an independent individual and the emancipation of human nature were bold rebellions against non-human oppression. Xin qingnian endeavored to promote the universal spirit of mankind. In June 1918, the magazine published a special issue on Henrik Ibsen. In the issue of December 1918, the magazine put together articles that proposed genuine individualism. In no. 6 of volume 5, the magazine published Zhou Zuoren’s “Rende wenxue.” This was arguably the most concrete declaration for revolutionizing the content of Chinese literature by New Literature. It unequivocally promoted “human literature” and rejected “non-human literature”:19

Any customs and systems that distort human nature should be rejected and rectified.… Any backward ideas and ancient rites and rules that hamper the development of individuality should be rejected and rectified.… What I mean by humanism is not charitable philanthropy but individualism that emphasizes the centrality of the self.

Hu Shi praised this essay of Zhou Zuoren as “the most unadorned and great declaration.”20 Zhu Ziqing claimed that it transmitted “the voice of the time.”21 Zhou’s proposition represented the ideal of May Fourth Movement. Xin qingnian’s promotion of individualism was influential among young people, leading to an era of individual emancipation. At the same time, however, mankind was struggling in a non-human world war—the globe was undergoing vigorous changes.

The influences of “human literature” transmitted beyond literature and spread through Chinese thought and culture. It voiced bold skepticism towards the general cultural environment that constituted “non-human literature.” On the surface, the promotion of human literature was young people’s rebellion against non-human

38


sovereignty and non-human condition, yet in the core of the movement was a wave of individual emancipation which also urged the emergence of a new society that could participate in the new civilization order after the First World War.

39


Prometheus of Modern Civilization The comprehensive process from thought revolution to language revolution and from thought emancipation to individual emancipation was the most important outcome of the May Fourth Movement. I have mentioned that the movement was influenced by the suffering of China that the Chinese intellectuals witnessed and their persistent dream to save and strengthen the nation. These factors invigorated New Literature’s revolution. Pioneers of New Literature qualified it with modern thoughts and temperament. I have stressed that the reality and history of China endowed inspirations and thought nutrients for China’s intellectual revolutionists. As Chinese intellectuals realized the decline of old China and sought a way to revive the nation, they turned to foreign examples for solutions. The revolutionists believed that the traditional culture represented by Confucianism not only failed to save the spirit of the people and remold the disposition of the Chinese, it was even the narcotic that intoxicated the nation. When the intellectuals became disappointed with their own tradition and criticized it vehemently, learning from the outside world became their prime and foremost interest.

We should pay attention to the open consciousness manifested in New Literature, which showed Chinese intellectuals’ determination to steal the fire of modern civilization to light up the darkness of the Eastern old empire. Writers who promoted New Literature through abundant creative practices and intellectual discussions were the Prometheus for modern China. Among the promoters of New Literature, the very first group was returned students who studied advanced science, technology, and culture in the West and Japan.

Zouxiang shijie wenxue—Zhongguo xiandai zuojia yu waiguo wenxue 走向世界文

學—中國現代作家與外國文學 (Toward World Literature: Modern Chinese Writers and Foreign Literature) edited by Zeng Xiaoyi comprehensively collected the works by masters of modern Chinese literature. For fiction, there were Lu Xun, Xu Dishan, Mao Dun, Yu Dafu, Wang Tongzhao, Lao She, Fei Ming, Shen Congwen, Ai Wu, Ba Jin, Shi Zhecun, Zhang Tianyi, and Lu Ling. For poetry, there were Guo Moruo, Xu Zhimo, Wen Yiduo, Li Jinfa, Bing Xin, Jiang Guangci, Feng Zhi, Dai Wangshu, Ai Qing, Bian Zhilin, and He Qifang. For prose, there were Zhou Zuoren, Feng Zikai, and Liang Yuchun. For drama, there were Tian Han, Xia Yan, and Cao Yu. The content involved dozens of countries and more than 300 writers, poets, and playwrights. They were receptive to foreign cultures and more adaptive to cultural shock when the East met the West. The trend of thought emancipation was daring;

40


writers made references to or borrowed from foreign culture freely.After severely criticizing advocates of traditional culture, Chinese intellectuals

rushed to worship Western culture. They were the winners of the vigorous cultural debates triggered by the May Fourth Movement which made them bolder afterwards. They were firm supporters of “taking and using” (nalai 拿來) Western culture. Lu Xun wrote that: “We have to take and use. We take things and use them, store or destroy them. Therefore, we will be the new master and our house will be a new house. If we do not take and use, our literature and art cannot be renewed.”22 He strongly criticized people who praised Chinese antique culture and China’s closed-door policy:23

China had continued its closed-door policy for a long time. People stayed inside and foreigners were not allowed to come in. Since China’s door was forced to open by guns and cannons, the Chinese has stumbled on many rocks all along. By now, we try to send our things out. For example in art, we have recently sent a batch of antiques to Paris for exhibition, but we don’t know how it turns out. A few masters of Chinese paintings brought with them some old and new paintings to exhibit in a few European countries and claimed that they were promoting national pride. I’ve heard that they plan to send Dr. Mei Lanfang to the Soviet Union to promote Chinese symbolism. He will then preach the art in Europe afterwards. I will not venture to discuss the relationship between the art of Dr. Mei and symbolism here. My point is simply that a living person has been treated as an antique object. I dare to say, there is already a certain sense of progress.However, we have not followed the rite of reciprocity and said: “Bring yours to us!”

At that time, progressive intellectuals all recognized the influence of Western culture and its contribution to China. When Zhu Ziqing talked about the rise of New Literature and New Poetry, he mentioned their direct relationship with the spread of Western culture and considered this the greatest influence. Liang Shiqiu pointed out that the import of Western culture set off the need to promote vernacular Chinese. He also mentioned that in the principles upheld by American impressionists, allusions and old references should be avoided. In the writings of New Literature, the use of punctuations and paragraphing were also modelled on foreign writings. The prevalence of translated foreign literature was another example.

Liang Shiqiu elucidated this relationship in “Xinshi de gediao ji qita” 新詩的

格調及其他 (On the Style of New Poetry and Other Issues): “I always consider the

41


influence of foreign literature the most important cause for the New Literature Movement. New poetry is actually foreign poetry written in Chinese.”24 He also pointed out that the poetic concept of the Crescent Moon Society (xinyue shishe 新月詩社) was foreign. Poets of the society experimented with rhythms and styles of foreign poetry in Chinese. Liang Shiqiu remarked that different strands of New Literature were more concerned with their artistic representation, and “the art of poetry, as a matter of fact, should imitate foreign poetry.”25 He further claimed that: “Foreign influence is good; we should welcome its invasion in the Chinese poetry circle.”26

In the age of thought emancipation, people were free to speak their mind. Behind some superficial discussions was some underlying new developments—such as the relationship between China’s New Literature and foreign literature. Awakened Chinese intellectuals recognized the complicated relationship between old literature, old culture, and old rites and laws. They believed that they were hindering forces to social progress and modernization. It was reasonable that new Chinese intellectuals endeavored to model on Western literature and culture so as to replace old Chinese literature and culture. We can see this in the process of the design, emergence, and formation of China’s New Literature.

China’s New Literature was not invented unexpectedly. Although it had a certain kinship with China’s traditional culture and literature, for they were connected historically, and New Literature also drew from old Chinese culture, it was a historical necessity that the latter was considered the subject to be revolutionized by New Literature advocates. When people determined to undermine the old paradigm, they also resolutely ignored and disregarded the value of that paradigm.

As a matter of fact, the revolution had brought remarkable outcome, which was largely a result of the boldness and determination of the pioneers of the New Literature Movement. The assimilation of Western culture encouraged the development of New Literature. The import of Western thought and culture was not merely a replacement; it elicited new changes in China. These new changes had attracted shock, anxiety, and even hostile repulsion.

The encounter of two different cultures inevitably caused contradictions and pain, but the result was favorable. It effected new assimilations and hybrids. Although the attempt of New Literature has not reached perfection in the past decades, we should not doubt its historical necessity and validity. In the decades of New Literature’s development, especially between the 1940s and 1970s, suspect towards and denial of the value of New Literature were prevalent in various political events. China’s oversensitivity towards foreign culture was exacerbated by rural communal culture and mentality. As nationalism and peasant awareness dominated the Chinese mentality, there was generally a sense of xenophobia in

42


Chinese culture. Criticisms against New Literature originated in Chinese prejudice towards foreign culture, which was itself a chronical cultural problem.

Whenever social and national crises aggravated, the obstinacy of Chinese culture reasserted itself through slogans such as “Promote national culture” (弘揚民族文化). Its target was always foreign culture, especially the Western civilization. Criticisms of this kind were always similar; conservatives accused reformists for “forgetting their past and ancestors” (數典忘祖) and “worshipping all things foreign” (崇洋媚外).In recent years, because concepts of international relations have entered ideology, the attitude of China towards foreign culture has changed in accordance with changing international relations. The changes were manifested as capricious governmental policies, which also adversely influenced the development of literature. Even after the implement of reform and opening up in the 1980s, the interference of old ideology did not cease returning. While economic interactions with other countries are inevitable, the attitude of China has become less strict than before, but the deeply-rooted suspect and enmity are difficult to remove.

Although the power of administrative intervention is still strong, it is possible for ideology to influence cultural strategies. Since the Cultural Revolution came to an end, Chinese literature began a self-reflection movement, which greatly elevated its self-awareness to get close to the Western world. On the practical level, China is on the same boat with other countries; what separates the cultures is on the mental level. From poetry, fiction, to other genres of art, China’s contemporary culture has entered the world order. The “Nobel complex” of Chinese writers which has been constantly criticized is actually an evidence of this phenomenon. Although the social turmoil took place in recent decades has obstructed China’s cultural interaction with the rest of the world, the development of Chinese literature is still moving forward steadily. Forces that hinder such progression cannot change the trend.

43


The Spirit of Democracy and ToleranceThe New Literature formed under the promotion of democracy and science was essentially guided by a democratic consciousness. It was directed by individualism and the Chinese intellectuals’ yearn for human literature. With the import and assimilation of foreign culture, New Literature Movement established on the basis of open-mindedness and individual emancipation. Democratic thought for art was formed rapidly. Equal opportunity, fair competition, individualism, and social responsibility were democratic concepts. The formation of democratic mindset endorsed China’s New Literature with a broad mind and vision. Therefore, in the initial stage of the development of New Literature was an unprecedented bloom of creativity and free competitive spirit.

Pioneers of New Literature stole the fire of enlightenment from Mount Olympus to light up the feudal darkness in China. They believed that the fire would be remedial for the sick society. As metaphorically represented in Lu Xun’s short story, “Yao,” pneumonia and feudal mentality were both chronic diseases of the Chinese society. The story attempted to call for people’s attention to the problem and hinted that the promotion of democracy and modern civilization would be a solution.

At that time, Chinese intellectuals endeavored to save the nation from the country’s backwardness and the grip of feudal forces. Their broad mind and bold confidence were consistent with the social atmosphere. Except some feudal defenders, people were not as narrow-minded as they later became. They despised playing antique curios, cultural relics, and Chinese traditional art. They also refused to study Confucianism and old poetry. However, under the principles of strengthening society and renewing the people, the promotion of tolerance was not only the academic, literary, and artistic principle of the Peking University under Cai Yuanpei’s management, but also a common cultural quality.

Zhou Zuoren advocated tolerance in literature and rejected forced unity. His argument was based on an emphasis on literature’s essence of freedom. He wrote:27

The subject of literature is to represent the self, and its function is to influence people. Literature is for individuals as well as mankind.… As people have different personalities, they produce different literary works. If we try to unify them through critical principles, even if such impossibility is realized, literature would lose its sole condition and could no long be called literature anymore.

44


The following line is of utmost importance:28

The lifeblood of literature is freedom but not equality, separateness but not unity. Therefore, tolerance is the premise for literature to flourish.

However, the principle of tolerance did not apply to old literature:29

Tolerant modern intellectuals would pay due respect to old literature, but we cannot apply tolerance here because old literature belong to the past. We are not in the position to consider the issue of tolerance for old literature.… In fact, whether advocates of New Literature should tolerate old literature is not a question we should concern with in the Chinese literary circle now, for New Literature is not mature enough to hold a dominant position. On the contrary, whether New Literature can stand the suppression from old literature is actually the question that requires our attention.

We can see that the spirit of tolerance of the May Fourth era was not simply unrefined acceptance but a clearly targeted and profound principle. It was an extension of the critical spirit of the era.

In the initial stage of the development of New Literature, literary groups and societies were common—they held different beliefs and competed with each other. The arguments between different groups and societies could be quite fierce sometimes, but there was no authoritative power that forced different views to be unified under a particular ideology. The rise of different strands of thought in the May Fourth era was a manifestation of democratic thought in art, as well as the establishment of literature’s free order. The free and competitive mindset of the time allowed a spirit of tolerance and fair competitions, which created new literary and artistic order.

It was precisely the unrestrained condition for free competition and discussion that nurtured the new generation’s broad vision. The artistic democratic spirit attracted many writers and intellectuals. The attraction guided them to pursue truth and inspiration in art. Writers and intellectuals did not have to rely on authoritative discourse for survival. Their talent and intelligence were given enough space to develop.

At that time, there was no official guiding principles for literature, hence no one was able to exert a unifying power on other writers. The development of literature could freely mature in accordance with their nature. Ideology and power were not forced upon literature. The artistic atmosphere during the May Fourth era was rather pure despite the artistic diversity, because the independence and freedom of

45


creativity of literature were protected.

People at that time valued freedom for literature. They rejected any forced unity. Zhou Zuoren quoted from a passage written by Zheng Zhenduo, which was originally published in no. 41 of Wenxue xunkan 文學旬刊 (Literature Weekly):30

To encourage a literature of blood and tear is not to ask writers to forsake his personal principles and work towards this direction together. It neither means there is no good literature except the literature of blood and tear. Literary writings are works of emotions. We cannot make happy people cry, just like we cannot make sobbing people smile.

The democratic concept based on unique features of literature was precisely the antithesis of the autocratic power that forced writers to give up their individuality and submit to a particular ideology.

Xu Huatian’s elucidation in “Chuang zuo de zi you” 創作的自由 (The Freedom of Literary Creation) was even clearer:31

I think in the world of literature, there should be absolute freedom. One should let emotions out naturally if he cannot hold the emotions. No one is entitled to making a certain barrier that keeps writers in it. Although we consider the world a sad place, perhaps people indulge themselves in love do not feel the same? You cannot forbid them from writing love poetry. Therefore, when we want to cry we should cry freely; when someone wants to laugh he should laugh freely. Who is to decide in the world of literature there should only be sad works but no happy works?

Zhou Zuoren was the most unyielding advocate of this kind of freedom. When people passionately developed New Literature and promoted the use of vernacular language in literature, Zhou was among the first to call for the promotion of human literature for enhancing the revolutionary nature of New Literature. When different literary groups keenly engaged in debates on the direction of New Literature, Zhou already noticed future problems in some perceptible signs. His concern was proved to be reasonable in what followed in history. In “Wenyi de tongyi” 文藝的

統一 (The Unification of Literature), Zhou criticized the following argument of Ma Qingchuan:32

If a writer cannot feel the universal boredom, comfort the general desolate spirit, and work on his own depression and complaints, he has nothing to

46


offer to the world. His feeling of weariness is his own experience. His feeling of happiness is his personal comfort. Neither is related to life in general. In other words, what he presents is only personal experience but not common feelings of mankind.

Zhou disagreed with the overemphasis on common feelings of mankind and negligence of personal feelings. He restated the importance of individuality of self in literature by saying that: “it is up to the writer himself to write about the sadness and happiness of people or his own.”33 It was a valuable aptitude for a literary critic to see in one particular article the future of a certain tendency. We can notice Zhou Zuoren’s sharp insight in the following paragraph:34

Literature is about life but not for life. They are related to personal experience, which is also the experience of mankind. The lifeblood of literature is freedom but not equality, separation but not unity. Any principle that goes against this will destroy the life of literature no matter what virtuous name it bears, resulting in stereotypical and pretentious works, which would indicate the decline of literature. The history of European literature shows the rise and decline of many purposeful literary movements. Only by the 20th century writers no longer try to impose a unifying project on literature but let different literary trends develop themselves. The development of literature has become more prosperous then. The situation is exemplary for us. I hope Chinese writers can give up their fantasy of unity and work practically on their own work. Only this is relevant to his work as a writer.

The words of Zhou Zuoren, to a certain extent, prophesied what happened decades later. Zhou’s warning on the development of literature showed his profound awareness. As a liberal of the era of spiritual and mental freedom, Zhou did not suffer from psychological disorder caused by external pressure. His confident words still appear impressive nowadays.

In the era of freedom and tolerance, people were generally persevere and lenient. They were persistent to defend their freedom of beliefs and pursuits regardless what others said. They lived according to their ideas and feelings and composed their own articles. Writers such as Yu Dafu and Xu Zhimo followed their own nature in both personal and social aspects. Their lives and writings were still meaningful topics for us after so many years.

Moreover, the free innovative spirit of the generation of New Literature writers was remarkable. Their writings were distinctive and they never duplicated others’ works. Yu Pingbo and Zhu Ziqing wrote very different essays even though they

47


wrote on the same topic: “Jiangsheng dengying li de qinhuaihe” 槳聲燈影裡的

秦淮河 (Qinhuai River Amidst Lampshadows and the Sound of Oars). Another pair of examples is the poems by Hu Shi and Liu Bannong on “Renli chefu.” The writers agreed on one topic and composed different works on it. For writers who happened to work on a similar topic, they were also able to show unique styles. For example, while Bing Xin’s “Nangui” 南歸 (Return to the North) was about the writer’s mother and Xu Zhimo’s “Wo de zumu zhi si” 我的祖母之死 (The Death of My Grandmother) was about the writer’s grandmother, both were beautiful essays in their own right.

Unity of literature was not possible for writers of that era. Even for advocates of unity, they rarely imposed their beliefs onto other writers. On the contrary, they understood and tolerated artistic pursuits that were different from theirs. Liu Yazi was one of the advocates of old literature and an important member of the South Society (nanshe 南社). He strived to maintain the status of old poetry. Interestingly, his viewpoint on the value and condition of new poetry was different from his stand. His article, “Xinshi he jiushi” 新詩和舊詩 (New Poetry and Old Poetry), is a good example to illustrate tolerance, freedom, independence, and democratic awareness of art:35

I am someone who likes writing old poetry. But I dare to say, no one will be writing old poetry after fifty years. “Ping ze” 平仄 was the life of old poetry, but the trend of the development of literature indicates that “ping ze” should be abolished. How would someone still write old poetry after fifty years if no one knows “ping ze” already? Maybe someone would ask, why some writers of New Literature still write old poetry then? I think this is just an abnormal phenomenon. Although their works are good, meaningful and fresh, maybe better than old poetry experts, this phenomenon will not last for long. Maybe someone would still ask, so why do you like writing old poetry? I think this is an issue of personal interest. I’ve mentioned a metaphor in the past. Chinese old literature was like opium—it was hard to get rid of if one was addicted to it. I am this kind of people. Therefore, even though I believe vernacular Chinese will replace literary Chinese, I still wish to write literary Chinese. Although new poetry will replace old poetry, I dare not to write new poetry and stay with old poetry. This is a matter of habit which is too difficult to quit.

The article was written in August, 1942 and published posthumously in issue 3 of Xin wenxue shiliao 新文學史料 (Historical Materials of New Literature) in 1979. The tolerant attitude represented the basic attitude of the May Fourth generation.

Part II

On Contemporary Chinese Literature

50


In a Special Humanistic EnvironmentContemporary Chinese literature is the name that scholars gave to the Chinese literature written since 1949. The 1950s as a phase division of the development of Chinese literature is for the convenience of study. The primary reason for the change was that during this period, the social system of China underwent significant changes. Chinese literature also experienced new developments.

Contemporary Chinese literature is the extension of modern Chinese literature. It was still under the influence of the goals set in the New Literature Movement that began in 1919. The spirit of New Literature was further developed in contemporary literature. Contemporary Chinese literature continued to modernize Chinese literature by emphasizing modern social and personal awareness in literary works so as to change the conservative social mentality and social separation caused by Chinese classical literature. In terms of content and expression, vernacular literature was more related to the reality of modern Chinese society. Contemporary literature continued to develop vernacular Chinese, making it a linguistic vehicle that was more appropriate to use in language practices of contemporary Chinese.

In the second half of the 20th century, the vigorous social turmoil, contradictions, and disputes happened in China were represented and recorded in contemporary Chinese literature. Although during this period, literature somehow regressed in its representation of individuality and psychological communication, the range, contexts, and aspects that contemporary literature handled were more extensive. This was particularly applicable to the representation of the pain and joy of common peasants and their endeavor to improve their living conditions. The representation was more real and in-depth than before. The Chinese society of this period was complicated and changeable. The literature of some specific periods, such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, even embodied the intoxication and madness of the whole society. Influenced by the social context, although literary creation retained the social mistakes and prejudice of its time, we can still see certain reality underneath its abnormality and absurdity. Literature was the best witness of the complexity of the Chinese society. Even if we only consider its historical value, it is still irreplaceable.

Responding to continuous calling for realistic depiction of life in literature, the literature of this stage showed strong contemporary characteristics. Such contemporaneity contributed to its uniqueness as contemporary Chinese literature.

51


However, after the Cultural Revolution, contemporary literature restored its broken connection with the May Fourth literary tradition and identified more with it. In addition, the meaning of “contemporary” was indefinite and vague; hence the use of the term “contemporary literature” caused some doubts. It is possible that the characteristics of the literature of this period as a comprising part of modern Chinese literature should be redefined, and the bygone “contemporary” period should also be delimited, but it would be unnecessary for people to suspect the demarcation.

The changing social environment provided new space for literary differentiation. It became the general context for the development of literature in the second half of the 20th century. When we talk about changes of the literary environment, the first fact was the separate development of Chinese literature in Mainland China and Taiwan (as well as Hong Kong and Macau) despite their common cultural origin. While Mainland China practiced socialism, Taiwan practiced capitalism. The two systems offered completely different sets of ideologies. The different social systems and ideological environments profoundly influenced the development of literature, shaping different literary phenomena separately.

Different geographical environments also had their effect on separate developments of literature. The literature of Mainland China conveyed a heavy sense of sadness loaded with historical echoes. Mainland China was strongly influenced by traditional Chinese culture, but the long literary history was also a cultural psychological burden. The formation of the cultural psychology was firstly affected by the topography of Mainland China. While at the north and northwest of the vast territory was the Gobi Desert, at the west and southwest were three large mountain ranges, the Karakoram, the Himalaya, and the Transhimalaya, that surrounded the ancient territory like high walls. There were only two openings to the ocean at the northeast and southeast, but the ports were blocked by the authority in the 50s. In contrast, Taiwan is an island—it is separated from the mainland by the Taiwan Strait, and geologically speaking, it belongs to the first uplift belt of the Neocathaysian structural system. We may reckon that its history of formation implies an ancient connection with the ancient Cathay territory. The island faces the East China Sea and South China Sea, surrounded by warm sea water of the Pacific Ocean. The subtropical warm climate nurtures the verdant vegetation on the island, and the culture manifests an elegant disposition similar to the culture of the south of China. After the Second World War, Taiwan began to have more extensive interactions with the world. The unique geographical and political environment of Taiwan has led to the formation of its own cultural temperament, which lacks the grandeur of traditional Chinese culture and shows a deeper sense of loss and solitude.

52


The vast territory of China accommodated starkly different natural environments, landscapes, and climate. From a cultural perspective, while the north was valiant and strong, the south was graceful and tender. However, the differences appeared differently in either interlocking forms or comprehensive unity in history. Perhaps the period of the Southern and Northern dynasties in 420–589 was an exception. More than two hundred years of war and confrontation and the encounter of different ethnic groups contributed to the formation of the different literatures of the south and the north. In the history of Chinese literature, the phenomenon of separate developments of Chinese literature that began in the 1950s was the most conspicuous. While having the same origin in traditional Chinese literature and the May Fourth Movement, the literature of Mainland China and Taiwan developed separately for decades and formed their distinctly different styles. Long-term separation of the nation was one of the tragedies China faced in the 20th century. In culture and literature, the tragic experience brought alienation, isolation, and confrontation, but when the two cultures met, new opportunities and possibilities will contribute to the prosperity of contemporary Chinese literature.

53


Praise for the Era and National EulogyMore than 100 years ago, on 5 May, 1896, poet Qiu Fengjia, who was born in County Miaoli 苗栗 of Taiwan, wrote a poem titled “Chun Chou” 春愁 (Vernal Melancholy):

In vernal sadness I cannot force myself to appreciate the mountains,

春愁難道強看山

The past startles my heart and my tears are going to drop.

往事驚心淚欲潸

Four millions of people cry together 四百萬人同一哭

For the ceded Taiwan on this day last year. 去年今日割台灣

The poem refers to the Treaty of Shimonoseki (Maguan tiaoyue 馬關條約) signed by the Qing government on 17 April, 1895 that ceded Taiwan to Japan, thus began the tragic long-term separation of the nation. The separation brought decades of instability and antagonism. Chinese literature was deeply influenced by such a historical context. In the second half of the century, the huge pain that contemporary Chinese suffered was directly affected by the political separation of the Mainland and Taiwan from the 50s.

The pathos was more fully manifested in Taiwanese literature of the 50s. After the Second World War, as 50 years of Japanese colonization of Taiwan ended, what followed was Kuomintang’s retreat to Taiwan with two million people, among whom were present and future writers. Their literary works portrayed the feeling of homelessness and nostalgic sadness of local Taiwanese and Mainlanders who fled to Taiwan. Sima Zhongyuan’s “Yeyan” 野煙 (Wild Smoke) depicts the narrator’s mother paying homage to wandering ghosts in a mournful tone. The story conveys ceaseless nostalgia through lyrical depictions of traditional customs and affective bonds: “It was precisely during those chaotic days I left home. In that autumn, no one cared to pick the ripe ginkgo fruits on the giant ginkgo trees…But the wild smoke of the red fire constantly returned to my mind, as I witnessed how it comforted the wandering souls lost in troubled times.” (離家時，正是荒

亂齊來的日子，也在秋天，大白果樹上成熟的白果再沒人收了…但我心頭總飄著

野煙和紅火，它那樣安慰著一些亂世漂泊的靈魂。)1 Qi Jun’s “Changgou liuyue

54


qu wusheng” 長溝流月去無聲 (The Silent Moon on Endless River Rolled Away) tells “a barely sustained hope” (一線幾乎完全斷絕的希望) of the narrator, who wishes that her lover could come to Taiwan.2 The story is infused with the sorrow of losing the past and facing an uncertain future. The silent meeting in the Fanghe Pavilion of Xihu Gushan and the encounter in a summer evening at Xiling Seal Art Society (xiling yinshe 西泠印社) have become distant dreams. The faith asserted in the line: “By then, moonlight will shine over Taiwan when we meet” (在台灣

將是月明處處，我們會相見的) ironically expresses its vanity.3 The sense of loss is represented as reminiscence of past prosperity in the fiction of Pai Hsien-yung. His “Youyuan jingmeng” 遊園驚夢 (Wandering in the Garden, Waking from a Dream) conveys a heavy sentiment of a painful past. “Yongyuan de Yin Xueyan” 永遠的尹雪豔 (The Eternal Snow Beauty) embodies an everlasting sorrow. The poetry of Yu Guangzhong expresses nostalgic feelings for things past. His poems “Xiangchou” 鄉愁 (Homesickness) and “Xiangchou siyun” 鄉愁四韻 (Four Stanzas on Homesickness) are both lyrical songs that reveal the pain of homesickness.

Contemporary literature of Taiwan inherited the sorrowful atmosphere of China’s literary tradition. Nostalgia in boarder poems was transformed into the motif of homesickness. Between the 1950s and 1960s, Taiwanese literature was infused with melancholic sentiments of homelessness. Nie Hualing wrote in Taiwan yishi 台灣軼事 (Taiwan Anecdotes): “They all suffered from homesickness. They wish they would be able to return home one day.” (他們全患思鄉「病」，

他們全渴望有一天回老「家」)4 The migration of Chinese to the Taiwan Island was the largest national separation which lasted for the longest time in the history of modern China. The pathos of the tragedy was embodied in contemporary literature in a realistic manner. Works related to this theme abounded in Taiwanese literature written in the decades after 1949. This might be considered a reward for contemporary Chinese literature despite the fact that it was actually resulted from a tragic context.

On the contrary, contemporary literature in Mainland China embodied a completely different disposition and atmosphere. By the end of the 1940s, China was finally freed from military devastation. Approaching the end of a long dark night, the suffering masses generally felt a sense of relief. Different from the melancholic atmosphere in Taiwan, Mainland China embraced a youthful joy and hope. The anticipation of happiness and people’s satisfaction with the present brought optimistic and passionate literature. Yan Zhen’s poetic lines: “flowers that are able to flourish all flourish; birds that are able to sing all sing” (凡是能開的

花，/全在開放；/凡是能唱的鳥，/全在歌唱。) properly summarized the literary atmosphere.5

After experiencing a century’s foreign invasion, the Chinese society was

55


generally confident about the advent of a peaceful era. As Japan surrendered and the Second Anti-Japanese War ended, people welcomed a new dawn for the country. Literature of this period showed a vernal atmosphere, reflecting the positive aspect of the Chinese mentality. People reasserted their good belief in a bright future, despite the hardship in chaotic times. Unfortunately, looking back with the benefit of hindsight we understand that such confidence just betrayed people’s credulity and naiveté.

The sense of joy in the literature of the 50s was directly instigated by the social transformation—the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. Contemporary Chinese writers inherited traditional Chinese intellectuals’ belief that educated men should actively participate in public matters (rushi 入世). Traditional Chinese intellectuals generally cared about their society and the people, and the affective connection was exhibited in contemporary Chinese writers’ confidence in the future of the nation and negligence of the past suffering. Ai Qing’s poem “Jiaoshi” 礁石 (The Reef) may serve as an example of this disposition. He wrote that when ruthless waves rushed towards the reef: “Its face and body/ are scarred like being blown by an ax./ But it stands firm, smiling before the cruel sea.” (它的臉上和身上/像刀砍過的一樣/但它依然站在那裡，而且微笑著面向肆虐

的海洋。)6 The spirit was ubiquitous in works written in the 50s. Another example is He Qifang’s poem “Huida” 回答 (Reply): “My wings are so heavy/like heaps of dust/ or like some grief/ on me and forces me to walk on the ground/ But I still strive to fly towards the sky.” (我的翅膀是這樣沉重/像是塵土/又像有甚麼悲慟/壓得我只能在地上行走/我也要努力飛騰上天空。)7 Writers of that era commonly showed this assertive and self-restraining disposition despite being ridiculed or even forsaken.

The joyance exhibited in the contemporary literature of Mainland China could also be attributed to the official guiding literary thought assigned by the authority. The guiding thought encouraged writers to not only engage in reality, but also endorse the present situation positively. The attitude led to the popularization of praise songs. The literary form assimilated ideological and political motives, hence for a long time optimism in literary works bred a certain vanity in contemporary literature. People idealized life and mistook idealization for reality. While optimistic literature could help to promote a positive attitude towards life among people, which would be beneficial for the betterment of the condition of society and life, this should not be regarded as the sole principle or dogma to be forced upon writers. For this, contemporary Chinese literature had suffered and paid a high price subsequently.

Sadness and suffering in modern literary works was replaced by forged happiness. Delusive optimism supplanted the sense of crisis in Chinese literature,

56


hence the early stage of contemporary Chinese literature showed a tendency of shallowness and frivolity. Writers awoke from the vanity as another period of social suffering followed. After the chaotic Cultural Revolution, Liu Xinwu’s short story, “Banzhuren,” took the lead to expose the “unseen filth splashed onto millions of souls” (向億萬群眾靈魂上潑去的無形污穢),8 depicting a terrifying scene of moral and spiritual downfall. Several decades after Lu Xun’s “Kuangren riji,” Liu pronounced an almost identical plea: “Help the children entrapped by the Gang of Four!” (救救被「四人幫」坑害了的孩子)9 Lu Xinhua’s “Shanghen” appeared at a later time. It revealed the scar left deep in the heart of a common mother and her daughter by that outrageous era. Ba Jin’s Suixiang lu 隨想錄 (Random Thoughts)was a prose collection that represented contemporary Chinese writers’ reflections on the politically chaotic period. A wave of “returned” (guilai 歸來) poetry swept through contemporary Chinese literature. People came to realize their emptiness and deficiency that were masked by fake happiness.

Mainland Chinese writers, who were once satisfied with decorating life with their writings, either awoke from nightmare of political prosecution or returned from imprisonment or exile after the Cultural Revolution. They were called “returners” or “survivors.” Although these writers were still able to maintain their faith in hardship, they were also clearly aware of their own suffering and the calamity that surrounded them. Political oppression and entrapment brought life crisis and fear. These writers assimilated their experience of political nightmares and grief in their literary works. Literary motifs of this period were usually related to the loss of youth, remembrance of past home, and vanished human qualities. Chen Rong’s novel, Rendao zhongnian 人到中年 (By Middle Age), which was adapted into a movie, was the prime representative of this kind of Mainland Chinese literature. The circumstances and destiny of the doctor, Lu Wenting, her husband, and their friends resonated in the whole society. Underneath the trend of Scar Literature (shanghen wenxue 傷痕文學)’s unearthing of sorrow and pain was an emerging critical attitude towards reality. It reconnected the line of thinking that literature should be life’s critique interrupted in the 1950s and further developed the tradition of crisis consciousness in Chinese literature.

From the 1950s to the 1980s, Chinese contemporary literature transformed from a literature of praise and happiness to a literature of the wounded and sorrow, embodying the joy and suffering of post-war Chinese society. Literary depictions of suffering began to examine China’s centennial crisis on a comprehensive level of both the personal and the social, giving the tragic sense in literature a sociological and human depth. Han Yu once wrote: “words of happiness are hardly sophisticated; words of suffering are usually refined.”10 From another perspective, when people have to face life’s most realistic and essential hardship, genuine feelings could be

57


more naturally and better articulated than forged happiness. Deceased writer Lu Yao talked about the necessity of pain for literary creation: “If you feel painful when you write, please don’t consider this a bad thing. Works written in pain will be brighter than works written in comfort.”11 Poets and writers always keep the company of anguish and suffering. Having the experience of anguish is often the first light of success.

58


Utilitarianism and the Change of PurposeExpressions of happiness and sorrow were representations of some basic qualities of contemporary Chinese literature. These qualities revealed a utilitarian view on the function of literature. No matter in Mainland China or Taiwan, Chinese writers have a tendency to execute the literary missions they identified with. In contemporary literature, literature for pleasure and entertainment still existed and some writers had made notable accomplishment in this aspect. But this kind of literature has never been the mainstream. It was frequently ridiculed and criticized. As it was a common idea that literature should be socially responsible, this kind of literature was considered irresponsible. The idea was prevalent during the period in which writers had to face the social reality of the national crisis after the opium war, but it was also a continuity of the Confucian literary tradition.

In Chinese traditional conception of literature, literature is expected to benefit society and the people, as indicates in Lunyu 論語 (The Analects): “A man who can recite three hundred pieces of poetry by heart, but who, when the conduct of the affairs of a nation is entrusted to him, can do nothing, and who, when sent on a public mission to a foreign country, has nothing to say for himself. Although such a man has much learning, of what use is it?”12 Guided by Confucianism, traditional Chinese intellectuals believed that literature should serve society and be of some use for life and the world. Bai Juyi praised Zhang Ji’s Yuefu poetry for it “satirized presumptuous emperors” and “scolded corrupted officials.”13 In terms of personal cultivation, Zhang’s poetry could “make a shrew gentle” and “make an insincere husband honest”; in terms of social civilization, Zhang’s poetry could “enlighten people” and “nurture human feelings and nature.”14 These concepts have passed down from ancient Chinese society to contemporary Chinese literature.

The May Fourth Movement as a part of the largest nation saving and enlightening movement was closely connected with the crisis of the time. Cai Yuanpei discussed the historical context:15

People began to feel that China’s weapons were not as good as those of the Western world after they got into contact with foreigners and were defeated several times in the late Qing. But they also realized later that China could hardly catch up with the West in terms of politics, education, and academic studies. Hence Chinese intellectuals promoted a cultural reform to improve

59


the nation’s politics and culture. Kang Youwei and Tan Sitong were the most famous leaders.

The social and national crisis directly ignited the passion of Chinese writers who decided to devote themselves to the promotion of New Literature. Giving up studying medicine and taking up the responsibility of a writer, Lu Xun believed that the numbness of the Chinese who were contented with being “indifferent spectators” (kanke 看客) could not be cured by medicine. Unless literature succeeded in cultivating the masses, the Chinese would remain in the darkness of ignorance and superstition; revitalization of the Chinese society would be but a dream.

The functions of literature had been an area of heated dispute for modern Chinese literature. As I discussed before, the emergence of New Literature was an outcome of China’s national crisis; literature was promoted to cure social sickness and educate the masses in order to save the nation. However, New Literature and the May Fourth Movement allowed the co-existence of diverse beliefs and concepts as modern intellectuals were influenced by Western ideas of freedom, democracy, and individual emancipation. Diversity was one of the characteristics of the era of freedom of thought. Precisely because of this, New Literature in its initial stage maintained both traditional social awareness and the freedom that it acquired.

Briefly speaking, there were two opposing ideas regarding the functions of literature: literature for life’s sake and literature for art’s sake. The Association for Literary Studies was a representative group for “literature for life’s sake”:16

They promoted literature of tear and blood and believed that writers should respond to their times and be sensitive to the suffering of society. Writers should not stay in the ivory tower, as they were representative figures of the world. They had deeper feeling and awareness of the suffering and hardship of society and the nation.

The early Creation Society believed in “literature for art’s sake,” which was completely different from the belief of the Association for Literary Studies. They asserted that “literature had its inner meaning. Writers should not include it in their utilitarian calculations. The subjects of literature should be the pursuit of beauty and pleasure. We should follow them sincerely.”17 Another group which also promoted “literature for art’s sake” but with a more playful tone was the “School of Mandarin Ducks and Butterflies” (yuanyang hudie pai 鴛鴦蝴蝶派). Writers of this group were constantly criticized by progressive writers.

However, the social reality of China compelled modern Chinese literature to leave pure aesthetic pursuit aside. This was evident in the conversion of the

60


members of the Creation Society to revolutionary literature, as they pronounced: “Our tears will be the fountain of new life. Our pain is the labor pain for giving birth to a new beginning… We should be like the eruption of volcanos, sweeping and burning away all corrupted existence.”18 Furthermore, they also voiced their awareness of their social responsibility: “We know we are a part of society. We know we love our people—regardless their appearance…no real artists will ignore social problems. They despise ugly social institution, and sympathize with kind people who face unfair situations.”19 No wonder why Zheng Zhenduo observed that the Creation Society was an “alliance of the literature of tears and blood” when he commented on the transformation of the Creation society.

The destined convergence was driven by the social context of modern China. New Literature started with diversity because it was influenced by international trends and encouraged by the spirit of freedom of thought. Later, the Chinese society exerted its effect on these trends and they gradually assimilated the Chinese influence. Literature that reflected social crisis dominated over literature that prioritized aesthetic pursuit, reducing the various functions of literature to more utilitarian ones, forcing literature to move towards a direction that was close to social reality and useful for changing social living condition. The ideological driving force constantly required literature to uphold a single value instead of different values.

Moreover, the “single value” changed in different periods of modern Chinese history according to the country’s political changes. But in general, it was always related to social utilitarianism. Fu Sinian pointed out: “The promotion of the school of aesthetics has already failed. The orthodoxy of modern literature is literature for life.”20 “The school of aesthetics” referred to those literatures that pursued literary pleasure instead of social utilitarianism. In the Chinese context, the pursuit of literary pleasure was usually suppressed and hard to enter the mainstream.

During the May Fourth era, “literature for life sake” emphasized less on the universal condition of life or ultimate concern of life as such, but more on the social reality of China and the destiny of Chinese people. The assertion of the Association of Literary Studies applied to reflecting the reality of human life, embodying the social reality of China in realist works. Therefore, their idea of “literature for life’s sake” was also “literature for reality’s sake.” Lu Xun commented on the fiction writers of Xinchao 新潮 (New Wave Magazine) : “They only write when they have a purpose. They construct the mechanics for reforming society—although they do not have an ultimate goal.”21 Hence, situated in the unstable and changing society of modern China, New Literature sought its purpose in accordance with social needs and it had always been purposeful. Despite its changing goals, literature as “the mechanics for reforming society” did not change. Purposeless literature

61


would be ostracized. From the conventional view of the Chinese society, “literature for art’s sake” was not considered purposeful.

After the 1920s, the nature of the New Literature Movement underwent a rapid change, turning from a literary revolution to the promotion of revolutionary literature. The change in focus led to a significant change in the concept of literature. During this period, the mainstream proposition of “literature for life” changed hastily to “literature for revolution.” While it was still emphasized that literature should be close to social reality, a more radical attitude had already driven literature to becoming a means of ideological propaganda, as indicated in a manifesto essay:22

Capitalism has come to an end. The world is now divided into two camps: the isolated fascist city of residue capitalism and the global alliance of the masses of peasants and workers all over the world. Individuals should organize themselves for the purpose of struggle. Workers of literature and art should take up their duty…We should sincerely and eagerly describe what we see in the battlefield [of class struggle]: the pathos of the masses of peasants and workers, their heroic acts, and the happiness of victory—this can ensure our final triumph. You will achieve greatness and live up to the name of a warrior.

Modern Chinese literature was suddenly plunged into an absurd situation. Literature drifted away from being the channel of aesthetic expressions and submitted to serving abounding slogans. From “for national defense” (為國

防) to “for the masses” (為大眾), slogans changed constantly but the nature of literature being in service to mainstream ideology did not change. The political use of literature was further developed in the 1940s. At that time, it was promoted that literature should be “led by the proletariat.” The prevalence of the concept “literature should serve the revolutionary masses of workers, peasants, and soldiers” was encouraged by the authority.

Contemporary Chinese literature emerged under such a context. In the long report by Zhou Yang, “Xin de renmin de wenyi” 新的人民的文藝 (New Literature and Art for the People), published in July 1949, the author reaffirmed the basic principle of the aforementioned concept: “We firmly believe there is no other direction. If there is, it would be a wrong one.”23 His words were concrete descriptions of the situation of the literary production of the areas under communist control in modern China:24

National and class struggles and labor production became dominant motifs

62


in literary works. The mass of workers, peasants, and soldiers become heroes in literary works just as they do in society. Intellectuals are generally depicted as working cadres to work for the enterprise of emancipating the people and provide intellectual labor for physical laborers. If intellectuals leave people’s struggle and indulge himself in his personal life circle and emotional world, his writing will become trivial and meaningless. He will have no status in the literary circle of the liberated areas (jiefangqu 解放區). Since the May Fourth era, literary works that portrayed the pursuit and yearning of awakened intellectuals and their solitude as idealistic pioneers who hadn’t joined by the action of the general masses were doubtlessly enlightening. But now, under the guidance of the Chinese Communist Party, we have worked hard for more than 20 years and achieved high awareness and organizational proficiency in politics. It is time to determine the destiny of China by action. If we do not do our best to get close to them, describe them, but stay in the small circle of intellectuals, we are actually separating ourselves from the masses, and we will seriously violate the historical reality and the principle of realism.

Written in a time of political change such as 1949, what we see in the report of Zhou Yang is only repeated emphases and some concretization of official policy of literature but no intention to elucidate on how literature could respond and adapt to the new situation. Following Zhou’s proclamation was a series of keen debates on how to represent the petite bourgeoisie, middle people, and literary subjects.

From the 1950s to the end of the Cultural Revolution, China’s contemporary literature experienced various political stages such as “serve proletarian politics” (為無產階級政治服務), “serve the people” (為人民服務), and “serve socialism” (為社會主義服務). However, the changes in slogans by no means signified changes in the mainstream concept of China’s New Literature. After the 1950s, literary utilitarianism was included in state administration as society came under the control of the Communist Party. More vulgar and superficial interpretation of literary utilitarianism caused literature to become the tool and weapon for politics and ideology. To serve political duty was the first, or the only, principle of literature.

When literature became the spokesperson for the state or society, the qualities and nature of literature no longer matter. Writers’ only concern was whether literature fulfilled its duty as the spokesperson. As such, the subjects and motifs for literature were limited. Writers could only write praises for life and politics. Whether a writer made good praises of the current situation became the only standard for judging his class, attitude, and standpoint. If a writer was considered politically correct, he would be protected even though his art was not good enough, or even bad, only because he maintained the authorized standpoint.

63


The Spokesperson and Literary IndividualismThe “Era of Praise” (songge shidai 頌歌時代) of China’s contemporary literature appeared in the 1950s. Embracing official slogans and propaganda, writers who desired recognition of their progressiveness constantly praised the new society, new life, and new people with great passion. Some even misbelieved that the basic nature and mission of lyric poetry and lyric poets was to praise.25 Such misconception eventually led to distorted literary development. Undeniably, literature borne the class consciousness of different classes in a society constituted by social classes, but literature should not only serve a particular class. Moreover, there would not be only two opposing classes in any class society. Writers wrote about the situations of different classes and their worldviews would promote literary variety. Writers who believed in their own righteousness refused to become the tool of a particular class. Writers and artists chose their attitude towards reality and history freely according to real possibilities and conditions. Writers believed in their unique observation and understanding and decided their own styles accordingly.

In the 1950s, urban development accelerated. When social focus turned from the rural to the urban, the Communist Party promoted the Hundred Flowers Campaign (百花齊放，百家爭鳴) to encourage people to express they opinions. When writers decided to depict life according to their own understanding, potential crisis of the aforementioned class principle rose to the surface. In the history of contemporary Chinese literature, a large-scale condemnation was launched against Xiao Yemu’s short story, “Women fufu zhijian” 我們夫婦之間 (Between Husband and Wife). In the story, the husband, Li Ke, was an intellectual and the wife, Zhang Ying, was a member of the workers and peasants.26 Critique of the story focused on the author’s disrespect of workers and peasants and praise for the intellectuals. According to the standard at that time, people could only praise workers and peasants but not expose their weaknesses. A critic contended that:27

If Zhang Ying was intended to represent someone that worth praising, as she is a laborers’ heroine… the writer should have depicted how she followed the principle of the party and was a cadre who coordinated political activities. She should be represented by the qualities of simplicity and diligence of the laboring people. But in the story, Zhang is represented as someone without any heroic quality or communist ideals.

64


The commentator criticized that, Xiao Yemu, as the author, screenwriter, and director did not adopt the proper attitude when handling the praiseworthy character; instead, his portrayal was even detrimental to the image of the character. The same problem also occurred to Wang Meng’s “Zuzhibu xinlai de qingnianren” 組織部新來的青年人 (The Young Newcomer in the Organization Department) and many other works. The Hundred Flowers Campaign launched in 1956 encouraged many writers to express their own views. They exposed the dark side of the reality different from the bright literary works produced before. Works of this kind aimed at “disturbing life” and revealing life’s darkness. This was considered a violation to the guiding principle at that time. This group of writers were all severely censured and punished in the anti-rightist party struggle without exception.

Numerous tragedies of contemporary Chinese literature were the outcome of several political movements imposed upon literature, but they only represented the outward phenomenon. The real cause for the tragedies was the regime’s political standard established on the basis of social utilitarianism. Under such a standard, many writers and their writings could not be rightly judged—when the politically biased judgement was applied, people usually claimed: “political standard comes first, artistic standard second.” However, in reality, only political standard was considered and applied. If a writer blurred or inverted his subject of praise and subject of exposure, he would be condemned regardless the artistic value of his work.

Political and ideological motives required writers to compliment and approve the people and criticize the people’s enemy; only such an attitude would bring support and recognition, otherwise, writers actually plunged themselves into danger because of their works. The authority endorsed writers by saying that they “have adopted the right position” and “have upheld realism.” In real life, contradictions were mixed and became upside down (as occurred in the anti-rightist struggle and the Cultural Revolution), and Communist Party members and supporters themselves were not flawless human beings. Writers were constantly caught in quandary and they could hardly write about the true condition of life. Although the formation of Chinese literature’s “Era of Praise” was the outcome of theoretical promotion, and writers also supported it sincerely (which had turned vulgar later on), the trend drastically drove literature towards superficiality and pretense.

Literature was an enterprise for the public. It represented the living and spiritual condition of all walks of life. Literary motive and outcome should be based on writers’ own independent conscience and free understanding. Literature should not attach itself to other things, especially power and money. Writers should be distinguished from political spokesmen. Chinese contemporary literature was

65


adversely affected by narrow utilitarianism; the same also happened to the anti-communist battle literature in Taiwan, which also promoted political propaganda albeit a completely different one.

Hu Shi believed that there were two theoretical foci for China’s New Literature Movement: living literature and human literature. According to Hu, the former referred to revolutionizing Chinese literature’s language and the latter referred to the revolutionizing literary content.28 What he referred to as “human literature” was “healthy individualism.” Hu used a line from Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House to elucidate his point: “I believe that before all else I am a reasonable human being.”29 The core of Hu Shi’s idea was literature’s emancipation of the individual, while the context for this was the non-human oppression imposed on Chinese people by the long history of feudal tradition.

As mentioned previously, an important essay on human literature in the history of China’s modern literature was Zhou Zuoren’s “Rende wenxue.” As a pioneer, the essay greatly developed New Literature’s proposition of human literature. Its content had significantly surpassed the discussion of individual emancipation at that time: “What I refer to as ‘humanism’ should begin with the individual. To speak of humanism and love for mankind, one should firstly be qualified as a human being.”30

The foundation and premise of human literature promoted by Zhou Zuoren was the establishment of individual subjectivity, the confirmation of the dignity and right of the self. The idea aimed at upholding individualism and encouraging creative freedom. This brought about the free literary styles of the early May Fourth era. Writers enjoyed a freshly emerging freedom in their writings, which was the most valuable environment for the birth of New Literature.

In the 1920s, theories for revolutionary literature abounded. The prevalence of class theory pronounced a definite direction for New Literature. Promoters of revolutionary literature claimed: “Individualist literature is already out of fashion, but the ugly individualists are still moaning in the literary market.”31 The most extreme proposition was to ask writers to forsake themselves and became a gramophone. Promoters, such as Guo Moruo, believed that this was “the best principle,” and even announced that: “anyone who thinks they are humiliated, we have no more to say and will ask them to stand on the guillotine!”32 In a later essay, Guo continued to develop his metaphor of the gramophone and ask young writers to “give up their individualism and join collective social activities.”33 His essay also described the “battling process”: first, the person should get close to the masses of workers and peasants to acquire the spirit of the proletariat; second, he should overcome his old bourgeois ideology; third, he should express the newly acquired ideology in real life and reproduce the ideology so as to consolidate it.34

66


As the Chinese society suffered from long-term hardship and yearned for reinvigoration, people were vulnerable to radical thoughts. Revolutionary movements for saving the country were collective activities. Under this situation, radical thought continuously forced writers to suppress their individuality and erased the uniqueness of creative writing. The promotion of revolution asked for unlimited support for social collectiveness. Promoters appreciated political collectivism and unified thinking in creative activities.

After the 1950s, new state policies on literature also emphasized collectivism. The authority believed that collectivist thought represented the direction of socialism, while individualist thought represented the direction of the bourgeois. In order to promote collectivism effectively, the authority even tried to propose new interpretations of the May Fourth New Literature. Zhou Yang, in his “Fayang wusi wenxue geming de zhandou chuantong” 發揚五四文學革命的戰鬥傳統 (To Develop the Tradition of the Battling Spirit of the May Fourth Literary Revolution), proposed to “nurture and develop new personality,” and gave a new definition of “personality”:35

The personality we ask for is the quality of connecting to and assimilating with the people, the willingness of offering everything one has to the enterprise of the people. One should oppose filthy individualism of the bourgeois, which is a destructive personality incompatible with the new society. Our literary works should proactively nurture people’s collective thought, helping them to overcome the individualism in their consciousness.

The “human literature” previously favored by May Fourth writers could no longer exist, since writers voluntarily or were forced to give up their individuality.

The creative personality and personal observation of the spirit and material world of writers were suppressed. All reflections on social and personal living phenomena could only be expressed from a collective angle deprived of any individualist character. An example to illustrate the effect of the weakening and dismissal of the self was the inhibition on the use of personal pronoun. The most prominent case was the poetry of Guo Xiaochuan. In the 1950s, Guo modelled his political poems on the works of Soviet Union poet, Vladimir Mayakovsky. The content of Guo’s poetry undoubtedly accorded with the collective thought and image of socialism-communism. He encouraged young people to battle on as an experienced revolutionist. All these were in line with mainstream communist literature. However, the use of “I” in Guo’s poetry attracted antipathy and criticism. Guo responded to the harsh comments in one of his article:36

67


Some comrades ask me: why do you frequently use “I” in your poems? Why do you want to emphasize yourself? I have reflected a lot on these questions. In the previous poems “Zhi qingnian gongmin” 致青年公民 (To Young Citizens), I wrote lines like “I call for…” and “I wish…,”I admit that I was a bit arrogant, so I made changes in my later works. However, I have to make this point clear: the “I” used in my writing is only a pronoun that is similarly used in fiction. It only signifies the first person point of view but not the real self of me. “My experience,” “my thought and feeling” do not necessarily belong to me. I am not sure if it is appropriate to think in this way…

Guo Xiaochuan’s ideas were actually basic literary knowledge, but people still had problems with them in that absurd era. As a poet who cared for the people and concerned with artistic exploration, Guo Xiaochuan showed a distinct personality among the poets of the 1950s. However, Guo frequently suffered from criticism for his works. His famous poem, “Wang xingkong” 望星空 (Looking at the Starry Sky) was severely censured because it expressed individual reflection on the temporariness of life and the infinite greatness of the universe. One of the critics of the poem wrote: “The guiding thought of this poem is individualism and nihilism. The poem corrupts the thought of the poet and spreads corrosive effects among readers.”37 The critic sternly condemned “filthy” individualism: “The nature of individualism is fragility; any setback will make individualists feel futile! ‘Wang xingkong’ is a poem that represents the despair of an individualist when he is defeated!”38

The consequence of this kind of criticism was the dwindling or even disappearance of personal discourse in literary works, which consequently resulted in the degeneration of writers’ personal creativity. Contemporary writers were particularly cautious when they produced their works. They worried that showing strong personal consciousness in their writings would hamper the development of collective consciousness and that they would be accused of endangering collectivism. As such, personal creativity, insightful observations and understanding, and talented artistic expressions and styles were all drowned in the sea of formulated and unified writings.

The year in which Ru Zhijuan’s short story, “Baihehua” 百合花 (The Lily), appeared, 1958, was a special time. The tempest of the anti-rightist struggle in China’s literary and artistic circle had just ended; the Great Leap Movement followed was carried out in full swing. Although the subject of “Baihehua”—war—was normally considered politically correct, the style, perspective, and atmosphere of it were incompatible with the social context. The story still attracted some harsh

68


criticism despite that Mao Dun expressed support for it. One of the critics questions the author: “Why the author doesn’t portray the most representative images of the time but deliberately pays attention to minor characters?... The characters in the story have not reached the level of contemporary heroes.”39

“Baihehua” was a survivor in the trend of literary collectivization in the 1950s. The criticism expressed against it showed the severe restrictions imposed on creative individuality and personal style. Many works of contemporary Chinese writers at that time did not value creativity, nor were the writers encouraged to discover the truth of life and history. They were also discouraged to have independent observations and thinking. Frequent political movements and aggravated thought struggle caused serious sense of insecurity among writers. They rather chose to exchange literary creativity for personal safety and stability of life than to defend their free mind. Therefore, we entered an era of literary anemia. The Cultural Revolution was an extreme manifestation of the phenomenon. Originally, there were still some writers who wrote at the margins of the barren literary circle, but during the Cultural Revolution, their works were also banned; what remained were only some model operas (yangbanxi 樣板戲). The authority claimed that the history of Chinese literature was a blank paper; the ancient history was a history of thought domination by feudalism, capitalism, and revisionism, while the recent history was a history of the autocracy of the reactionary dark route. A new era of China’s literature began with the Peking opera revolution led by communist standard-bearers.

Those model operas produced during the Cultural Revolution, from their content, form, to method of production, were products of collectivization without exception. These works were complete opposites of the works that upheld individual emancipation during the May Fourth period. In fact, no matter in what historical period and in what way people’s thoughts change, creativity and unique styles of individual writers are indispensable for the development of literature. Sadly, these were impossible ideals in an age that derided and forbade creative freedom.

Part III

A New Era of Chinese Literature

70


Slanted History and Literary AlienationHarmony with Potential Crisis

After the New Literature Revolution of the May Fourth period, we entered a new era of contemporary literature. Works produced during this period showed optimism for the new life brought by the change in China’s political situation and its future. Published in 1958, Yang Mo’s historical novel, Qingchun zhige 青春之歌 (The Song of Youth), told a story of the generation of intellectuals who participated in the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, represented by the heroine, Lin Daojing. In Zong Pu’s short story, “Hongdou” 紅豆 (Red Beans), the heroine, Jiang Mei, similar to Lin Daojing, also made personal sacrifices for idealistic values. We can see in Jiang Mei the passion of writers at that time for giving up their individuality and devoting themselves to the collective enterprise of New China. The prevalence of realist literature was related to the roles of these writers: in being the destructor of old life and the constructor of new life, they passionately recorded the social change. They were eager to depict the suffering, sacrifice, and courage of the people who experienced the wars and revolutions that led to the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.

We can compare the ending passage of Wei Wei’s Shuishi zui ke’ai de ren 誰是

最可愛的人 (Who Is the Loveliest Person) to the ending passage of Mao Zedong’s “Xin minzhu zhuyi lun” 新民主主義論 (On New Democracy):

Dear friends, when you travel on the first tram to the factory, when you carry a rake on your shoulder and walk towards the field.… When you feed your children with an apple and have a leisure walk with your lover… Dear friends, do you realize that you are living in happiness?1

The station of New China has come to us, we should welcome it.The mast of the ship of New China has risen above the horizon, we should applaud it.Raise your hands, New China is ours.2

We can see in the similarity of these passages the reason for the formation of an interest in representing history in novels such as Liu Qing’s Chuangye shi 創業史 (A

71


Pioneer’s History) and Zhou Libo’s Shanxiang jubian 山鄉巨變 (Great Changes in Mountains and Villages).

Literature of this period reached a climax in terms of the production of depictions for the birth and development of the new era and new life. Thanks to the popularization of realism, literature acted as an all-rounded record of the progress and decline of the Chinese society. We can see in Wang Wenshi’s “Xin jieshi de huoban” 新結識的伙伴 (New Acquaintances) new qualities of young Chinese women formed under the trend of new life. We can also see in Li Zhun’s “Li Shuangshuang” 李雙雙 that new female personalities had replaced traditional Chinese female personalities. Similarly, we can pick any of the ballads in Hongqi geyao 紅旗歌謠 (Red Flag Ballads) to illustrate how the Chinese, after suffering from long-term poverty and warfare, yearned for a more prosperous life. They all eagerly anticipated the realization of a communist utopian vision.

The Burdensome Fossilized Spirit

When the whole nation sang the ballads from liberated areas in jubilance, no one was ever aware of the burden laid on literature, which had its root ingrained in the Chinese tradition. In China, the concept that literature should convey morals and aspirations was a persistent requirement for literature. Confucian aesthetics turned poetry (shi 詩) into classic (jin 經), even romantic love of people was used to teach morals. The famous line from “Guan ju” 關雎: “The graceful maiden is a good companion for the gentleman” (窈窕淑女，君子好逑) was interpreted to upheld the virtue of women. The value of literary writings was used for state and political purposes, and the act of writing was considered a means to manage the empire. Such a mentality implied the belief that literature was only valuable when it was an effective vehicle for conveying morals.

The New Literature Movement did not question this traditional mentality. In his preface to the part on prose essays in Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi, Zhou Zuoren classified prose essays into two categories: the kind that conveyed morals and the kind that conveyed aspirations. Beginning with the leftist literary movement, the traditional belief that literature should convey morals and aspirations was channeled into new revolutionary theory. The enterprise of literature was used to deliver revolutionary awareness. Progressive revolutionary literary views began to censure “art for art’s sake.” New Literature started to engage in a long-term exclusive combat. This kind of combat was invigorated by new literary ideology, but also drew its lifeblood from Confucian view on literature.

Early in the Chinese Civil War, some old liberated areas engaged in the land reform campaign and launched mass anti-landlord struggle. Plays such as Baimao

72


nü 白毛女 (The White Hair Woman), Chiye he 赤葉河 (The Red Leaves River) and Xuelei chou 血淚仇 (Blood-and-Tears Revenge) were used as political propaganda. Literature was directly subordinated to social movements. This relation was never questioned because its logic was already present in ancient Chinese thought. This mentality was also embodied in the practice of using model operas to promote revolutionary mass criticism in the Cultural Revolution. Later, the idea went so far that some rural organizations even believed that watching a film together could solve a practical problem.

Changes of time and context did not change the fossilized spirit of Confucianism. Mao Zedong famously claimed during the period of the Cultural Revolution: “to use fiction to rebel against the party is a bold invention.”3 In fact, the logic of this criticism was itself “a bold invention,” because even though fiction did appeal to people’s mind and spirit, it was impossible for it to threaten the state’s authority. Unlimited exaggeration of the practical value of literature was an absurd phenomenon. Unrestrained scaremongering of the potential destructive power of literature was used as an excuse to tyrannize intellectuals in many cases and produced many political tragedies.

From the late 1930s to the early 1940s, Chinese people suffered from the harsh reality of Japanese invasion and the Second World War. Literature was required to forsake its various functions, especially its aesthetic function, and serve only social purposes. Literature assisted in national defense: politicization, or even militarization, of literature and poetry was promoted; lyrical literature was exiled. In the early 1940s, Mao’s famous speech in the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art was a forceful summary of putting theory into practice, forming a systematic conception of literature, which confirmed that both the audience and subject of literature were workers, peasants, and soldiers. Based on this confirmation, the content of literature could only represent the life and struggle of the proletariats. Literature could only consist of forms that were familiar to the proletariats, such as crowd performances and posters. Politics and aesthetics were evaluated with different standards and politics always came first. Popularization and refinement were two different directions and popularization always came first. Literature for promoting nationalism and collective unity was officially encouraged, thereby causing an obstruction between literary production and literary diversity in terms of its content and form, as well as an isolation of Chinese literature from world literature.

Although writers of this era also produced important works such as Baimao nü and Wang Gui yu Li Xiangxiang 王貴與李香香 (Wang Gui and Li Xiangxiang) which embodied the spirit of the time, those works were far from being world-class literary writings. Many of the works were not even enduring works in the

73


history of Chinese literature. They were only considered influential in a particular historical time and context. These works had their charisma, but instead of being artistically attractive, this charisma only arose from the populist excitement they provoked in people who had just experienced immense suffering. They had an unequivocal social utilitarian purpose, that is, to raise people’s class awareness through tear and blood. But when the importance of this purpose faded out, the charisma also disappeared. Some works only imitated the form of model works; they only had regional or temporary values at most but could never access the realm of eternal literary value.

Because of self-enclosure, Chinese literature and culture became an independent system that precluded interactions and communications with other cultures in the world. When we review our history, it was quite reasonable that intellectuals at that time placed their hope of saving the nation on peasants, who were both the producers and warriors. Artistic policies and directions that focused on peasants still had their groundbreaking significance. Intellectuals and writers created a special literature that had the barren Loess Plateau as its context. This literature was available to illiterate or half-literate peasants because its creators adapted rustic and primitive literary forms in their works. Traditional forms of folk art such as xintianyou 信天游, Shanbei jianzhi 陝北剪紙, yaogu 腰鼓, and yangge 秧歌 were valued as high cultural forms. Literary revolutionaries believed that they had created a new artistic tradition that served the lower social class.

Deviation and Separation

When the Second World War ended and the People’s Republic of China established, Chinese intellectuals still keenly participated in revolutionizing the old Chinese society and old literature. They participated in government-oriented literary enterprise by promoting a particular set of literary policies and experience, trying to unify the literary modes of old society, as well as the literature of areas formerly under the control of Kuomintang, who relocated to Taiwan after the Chinese civil war. The first meeting of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles (Zhongguo wenxue yishu jie lianhehui daibiao dahui 中國文學藝術界聯合會代表大會) was convened in 1949, which, on the surface gathered literary and artistic groups from different political regions in the country, but in truth claimed communist victory by requesting non-revolutionary writers to recognize the righteousness of the revolutionary literature of liberated areas and perform self-critique.

Since then, many literary masters who inherited the spirit of freedom and creativity from the May Fourth Movement engaged themselves in different levels of self-reform and denunciation of their art. The battling spirit of Lu Xun—a

74


critical mentality towards present social order was neglected. The timid aspect in the character of Chinese intellectuals dominated the intellectual community (while Lu Xun himself was an exception). The intellectuals were doubtful about themselves rather than the social environment or order. In waves of thought reform movements, intellectuals plunged themselves into rigorous self-questioning and self-denunciation. However, if intellectuals denounced themselves in ways that were not officially recognized, they were still subjected to political oppression. Chinese poet, Mu Dan, composed “Zangge” 葬歌 (The Song of Burial) to announce the burial of his old self, but the poem was still accused of embracing individualism. He was later considered a reactionary and suffered from political prosecution until his death near the end of the Cultural Revolution.

Although some writers willingly gave up their own styles and literary subjects, some others followed the practices unwillingly. They forced themselves to write about lives that they were not familiar with, avoid portraying figures that were not workers or peasants, and only depict positive communist heroes of the proletariat class. As such, contemporary literature from the 1950s onwards was severed from the golden age of the May Fourth. The basic reason for this split was that people mistook regional-and-temporal-bound literary policies of the regime as universal and eternal literary principles. The enforcement of these policies forced all literary forms to conform to a particular standard. Reformed writers and writers that engaged in self-reform questioned themselves and all existing literary forms and styles. Former literary masters lost their insights for good art. They separated themselves from the previous golden age of literature which they themselves created before. The same writers colluded in the creation of a dark age in the history of Chinese contemporary literature.

The development of literature depended not only on the domestic environment but also interactions with the world. However, after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, international cultural scene was eliminated from government-oriented literary construction project, which was restrained by ideological guiding principles. In the initial stage of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, works of the Soviet Union were appreciated as models and classics, such as Maxim Gorky’s The Mother, Alexander Fadeyev’s The Young Guard, Lyubov Kosmodemyanskaya’s The Story of Zoya and Shura, and Nikolai Ostrovsky’s How the Steel Was Tempered, to name a few. The outcome of learning from the Soviet Union was an intensified belief in utilitarian view of literature. The view of seeing literature as textbooks of revolution and teaching materials for reforming people’s worldview corresponded to the idea of the liberated areas that literature should serve politics and social reality.

Choices were restricted under the political climate at that time. There was a

75


short time in the beginning that some Western works other than those from the Soviet Union were still allowed to circulate, especially classical and Romantic works from the West. However, these works were also banned later when they were classified as works of feudalism, capitalism, revisionism, or imperialism according to the social systems of their national origins. Because of the ban announced by the authority, Chinese intellectuals were cut off from any connection with world literature completely.

The literary disaster people experienced was an outcome of the government’s strict literary policies, which introduced and practiced class struggle in the arena of literature. Frequent political interference in literature caused many class struggle tempests in the literary circle. Ardent communist followers claimed that writers, poets, and critics were class enemies who had to be eliminated. Such destruction led to a prolonged period of barrenness in the history of contemporary Chinese literature.

76


A Huge Standardization ProjectDeviated Cultural Concept

Narrow literary policies led to the formation of narrow literary personality. For decades, the Chinese authority, with the collusion of Chinese intellectuals, repeatedly promoted certain social standards to unify literature. The starting point for such effort of unification was the belief that a particular social condition should have a corresponding form of literature, which should be pursued regardless the cost. Socialist culture or proletariat culture was antagonistic to old culture and literature, which should by all means be eliminated.

From desolate mountains to big cities, communist supporters found many symbols of exploitation, including imperial palaces. Therefore when Beijing underwent proletariat reform, the gate towers, city walls, and archways (pailou 牌樓) in the city had to be torn down. People mocked those conservative people who cried for not being able to stop the destruction. Ai Qing wrote a passionate poem to support the demolishment:4

One morning, I passed by the four eastern pailou,

一天早上，我從東四牌樓路

過，

And felt that the road was wide and bright.

忽然覺得馬路很寬，很亮，

I saw that the four pailou at the intersection

原來那擋在十字路口的四個牌

樓

Were being torn down by some workers.

被工人們呼嚷著錘擊著拆掉

了，

I shouted to them: “Good job!” 我朝著十字路口大喊一聲「

好！」

This was a cry from my heart. 這真是從我心腔裡發出的一聲

呼叫。

I heard that someone wept for this, 但聽說有人為了這件事哭泣，

Tears blurred his old glasses; 淚水模糊了他的老花鏡；

People had different preferences— 由此可見人的愛好是不一樣

的，

77


When some old things were disappearing,

當一些陳舊的東西消失的時候

Some old souls lamented. 會引起陳舊的靈魂的暗暗嘆

息。

The poem ended with these two lines:

All things that hinder us should be removed,

應該讓所有阻礙我們的東西滾

開，

Because we are the majority of the people.

因為我們是多數，是廣大的人

民。

The poem expressed a new concept of value: the preference of the majority was obviously different from that of the exploiters and “old souls.” The establishment of new culture was carried out at the cost of the destruction of old culture. The unification of literature was part of the national project of renewing Chinese culture. Various new restrictions and standards were applied to literature under this project. It was unfortunate that people did not realize such restrictions and standards were destructive for literature; they even believed that these policies would have positive effects. The policy-making body promoted their ineffective “construction” of literature. The more the authority enforced their policies, the more distorted the literary circle.

Extreme Literary Modes

The appearance of the “Great Leap folk songs” (dayuejin minge 大躍進民歌) provided a new formal standard for poetry. It became a kind of “model poetry” (yangban shi 樣板詩) for unifying poetry writing. While folk poets would have no difficulty with adapting to the new requirement, poets influenced by Western poetry or inherited the New Poetry of the May Fourth tradition were overwhelmed by the policy. When the policy was implemented, this poetic form was regarded as “the new direction for the development of New Poetry,” which had to be followed by all poets. Some poets tried to voice their hesitation and disagreement, for example, some of them questioned the scope of new folk songs. We can easily tell from the mild disagreement expressed by He Qifang and Bian Zhilin that there was a sense of anxiety and reluctance among poets when they were asked to produce model poetry.

78


The result of the discussion was obvious—under the literary order of Communist China, it was impossible for any literary discussion to be free and purely academic. Many poets paid a high cost for the project of poetry unification. The case of Cai Qijiao could serve as an example. Cai Qijiao was originally a poet who supported creative freedom; in face of the political situation, however, he had to distort himself and write new folk songs. In a poem, “Gaile yangqiang chang tudiao” 改了洋腔

唱土調 (Change the Western Accent to the Native Tone)—obviously, the Western accent was “non-revolutionary” while the native tone was “revolutionary,” so such a change was progressive—Cai wrote: “Let us sing folk songs today, and defer new poetry for tomorrow.” (今天且把山歌唱，明天再唱新詩歌) Sensitive critics immediately noticed the undertone of the lines and were determined to prevent possible “retrogression”: “We hope the poet not to see folk songs as a perfunctory alternative to new poetry. The poet should acquire genuine and patriotic love for our nation and our time through living with the masses and engaging in class struggle. We hope the poet’s new poetry for tomorrow is a kind of new poetry that develops on this basis.”5 There were many of this kind of examples—they first asked you to change your style, but when you changed they accused you of not changing well.

The standardization of literature became extreme that there were even regulations on how and what to write. The authority of the Communist Party did not allow any literary tone that did not depict a “clear and sunny” atmosphere because they believed they had brought a clear and sunny era to China. The basic tone of the literature of the Republic was positive and progressive; any writing that violated the basic tone would be considered antagonistic of the era. A standard was given to the emotional tone in literature. “Brightness” became a critical standard for judging literary works. The idea of “brightness” originated in Lu Xun’s writing. Mao’s sayings, such as “the more national the more international,” were deployed to manipulate the writing activities of writers. Communist supporters exploited Lu Xun’s name to launch battles such as anti-revisionism, anti-imperialism, and anti-return-of the-rightist. The tone of “brightness” propagated during this period was an antinomy of the general tone of the literature of the 1980s, in which Scar Literature was the mainstream. The joyful and daring tone of the past became an immense sea of grief and melancholy.

The Impasse of Self-Censorship and Self-Regulation

The fundamental reason for the degeneration of personal styles in contemporary Chinese literature was political conflicts and autocracy. The development of

79


literature should be like the growth of plants. If plants were trimmed by violent gardeners, trees would look the same and there would be no more variations.

When standardization was applied for a long time, writers began to censor and regulate themselves. They implemented and maintained the order with self-discipline. When the order no longer needed external forces to maintain, literature reached a stagnant impasse. Writers produced model poetry and model operas themselves without being told to do so. When a few “master writers” appeared, all others tried to imitate them. What was more pathetic was these “master writers” also repeated their own themes and subjects.

People gradually came to realize that the literary circle had become a closed empire. It was even forbidden to mention sunset—only festive sunrise was allowed, which ironically symbolized people’s frenzy religious support for communist ideals.

The abnormality of Chinese literature since the mid-1960s was an unprecedented literary disaster. 800 million people were deprived of the right to receiving education and learning culture. They were only allowed to read Mao Yulu 毛語錄 (Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung) and watch eight model operas. These model operas were standardized and purified works. The women in the operas had no husbands. In Shajia bang 沙家浜, The husband of A’qing Sao never appeared, because it was said that he had left the family for “doing business.” In Hongse niangzi jun 紅色娘

子軍 (The Red Women Troop), Wu Qionghua became a revolutionary and left her husband. In Baimaonu, the lover of the white-haired girl should be Da Chun, who joined the Eight Route Army, but their implied relationship originally presented in the opera was concealed when it became a model opera. Couple relationships were “purified” and the only emphasis of all model operas was on revolution, and this was indeed a terrifying phenomenon.

80


Tragic Cultural CharacterWhen the East Met the West

Historian Hao Chang wrote the following passage when he examined the cultural condition of China after the mid-19th century:6

While Western learning rapidly became the focus of national attention in Japan after the middle of the century, in China it was confined for decades to the treaty ports and to a limited number of government officials concerned with the management of the so-called “Western affairs.” The penetration of Christian missionaries into inland China in the decades after 1860 produced little in terms of intellectual communication; indeed, it actually created socio-cultural conflicts that widened the psychological chasm between China and the West. The majority of Chinese gentry-literati still lived in the mental universe of their own tradition.

He gave an example:7

An American who went to teach at one typical secular school in Japan in 1870 was impressed by the prominent place accorded to Western learning and the school’s sizeable collection of Western books. Yet had he visited a typical Chinese academy even twenty years later, he would have found scarcely any evidence of Western influence.

We can see that the degree of Chinese culture’s closure and resistance to foreign culture was astonishing.

In China, cultural assimilation and communication through activities of Christian churches only proceeded in a very slow pace. Hao pointed out that from 1860 to 1900,8

The proselytizing efforts of the Christian churches, both Protestant and Catholic, met with little success. In fact, in view of the leading role the Chinese gentry-literati played in the frequent anti-Christian incidents in late-nineteenth-century China, it would seem that the Christian missionaries did little to bridge the cultural gap between themselves and the Chinese social elite.

81


The Western powers’ military invasion in China finally woke the old empire from its dream of being the most powerful leader in the world. The intellectual circle who witnessed the crisis occurred by the turn of the 19th century endeavored to learn from the West and attempted to revive the nation. Accompanying this cultural awakening was endless psychological ordeal the Chinese who encountered foreign invasion and plunder. Before the May Fourth Movement, almost all effort of cultural reform ended up in vain. The success of the May Fourth Movement was gained at a high cost. However, the Cultural Revolution that took place from the late 1960s to the 1970s was actually a calamitous return of old culture.

When Chinese people’s traditional cultural conception confronted foreign culture, the terrified reaction of the Chinese revealed what Lu Xun termed as the abnormally low self-esteem of a nation that had stayed in backwardness for a long time. Because the culture itself was not strong enough, it refused interferences from foreign culture. The tendency was even stronger during a time of social instability. If the nation was as strong as the Han and Tang dynasties, people were less concerned with getting in touch with foreign culture. Unfortunately, these were only exceptional cases in the Chinese history.

After the prolonged period of closed-door policy during the Cultural Revolution, the strong sense of dejection after the revolutionary craze that finally came to an end compelled China to embark on a new program unfolded under the reform and opening-up policy. In the renewed encounter with the West, China’s cultural vigilance was still pathological. Some commentators expressed concerns towards blind worship of all things from the West and the loss of unique Chinese culture.

Normally speaking, Chinese people were proud of their rich culture and tradition. Refusal to interact with foreign culture could also be interpreted as a kind of psychological self-protection. Having a rich culture also meant that the Chinese considered themselves self-sufficient. They did not wish to seek assistance from outside. The conservative character of Chinese culture could be attributed to its self-reliance, which also constituted China’s cultural arrogance. Long-term isolation had led to China’s lack of understanding of the outside world, which was then manifested as arrogant ignorance. In contrast with rapid economic development, China still betrayed her cultural ignorance from time to time.

No matter in a situation of self-closure because of self-sufficiency or skepticism because of Chinese people’s cultural inferiority complex, the Chinese defended themselves by appealing to “nationalization,” “national tradition,” and “national character,” but the references of these signifiers were actually quite loosely defined. When the tools for self-defense became excuses to refuse international interactions, such cultural psychology continuously brought terrible consequences.

82


The Exclusiveness of Protectionism

Whenever literature faced the call for reform, especially when people sought to import foreign trends, some opponents would defend the preciousness of Chinese traditional culture. For example, when new intellectuals proposed to abolish classical literary Chinese, some conservative intellectuals praised the beauty of it, saying that “it was the most beautiful language in the universe.” When someone elucidated the artistic strengths of Western modern symbolic poetry, some critics would claim that Chinese poets had written “modernist poetry” for a long time, even though these critics were in fact skeptical towards modernist poetry, including the School of Misty Poetry.

The combination of self-pride and inferiority complex became a unique cultural character of China, which was actually a psychopathological characteristic. Neurotic vigilance caused a general repulsion to foreign influence, which was almost like a reflex reaction. In face of a foreign import, people rejected it only because it was foreign. But when they discovered its strength, they would give far-fetched reasons to argue that “China has had that since the ancient times,” or even claimed that it was originated in China. The Chinese attached strongly to their traditional culture; they were abnormally cautious to new things. In the beginning, they stubbornly and unreasonably reject them, seeing them as “invasions” with enmity. Their excuses were that these new things were “not suitable for the Chinese situation,” or that they did “not suit the usual Chinese taste,” and people who embraced these “lost themselves” and “failed to pay due respect to their ancestors.” Furthermore, these conservative commentators could raise many reasons to contend that foreigners propagated their culture with insidious intention. The best way to maintain psychological balance for such a resistant cultural mentality was to tag political labels on all foreign matters; these labels included “the bourgeois class,” “the petit bourgeois,” “revisionism,” and “imperialism.” The Cultural Revolution was partly incited by this kind of repulsion towards foreign culture.

However, the resistance from conservative Chinese did not last. In the beginning of the discussion of New Poetry, people generally had no leniency for any innovation that did not suit the existing taste. Artistic and philosophical newness were criticized on a political level. Hostile criticism, such as accusations of “worshipping everything foreign and fawning on foreigners” and “being a political dissenter,” were raised against progressive intellectuals. But when newer, stranger things appeared, public opinions became more compassionate to things they criticized before. When these things became acceptable, they turned their attention to criticizing newer things.

83


The Chinese xenophobia was caught in a vicious circle because the development of literature called for continuous innovation to stimulate the reading market. While artists sought ways to innovate their art, the audience or readers also looked for new creations and works. Hence when society returned to a normal state and its literary development was more natural, conservative “cultural guards” were always caught in this awkward situation: they rejected everything new in the beginning, but were forced to accept them afterwards.

The situation of other literary forms was similar. In the beginning, critics rejected Wang Meng’s new attempt in his fiction, which deviated from the norm set by his previous work, “Zuzhibu xinlai de nianqingren,” but after a while, they began to recognize the strangeness in “Chun zhi sheng” 春之聲 (The Voice of Spring) and “Hai de meng” 海的夢 (The Dream of the Sea). Zhang Jie’s “You yige qingnian”有

一個青年 (A Young Man) and “Shui shenghuo de geng meihao” 誰生活得更美好 (Whose Life is Better) won high acclaims among literary critics, but they criticized severely her other works such as “Shi maisui” and “Ai shi buneng wangji de.” The Chinese cultural conservativism has been quite a common chronical illness in the modern Chinese literary history.

The awkwardness of the cultural conservativism was also present in forms of art outside the literary realm. Shao Dazhen aptly observed:9

Educated under traditional culture, the cultural character of Chinese intellectuals tended to be conservative. They maintained absolute value standards in aspects such as theoretical concepts and rational belief. They were repulsive to relative and heterogeneous value standards. Speaking of the conservative intellectuals’ attitude towards the relationship between the individual and society, they lacked the awareness of participating proactively in the formation of culture. When they confronted foreign culture, they expressed an ignorant national pride, as well as a sense of inferiority complex, which were manifested in the view that all Chinese things were better than things of other nations… They rejected indiscriminately all things strange to the traditional cultural mentality.

Shao further discussed the situation in the realm of Chinese painting. When Qi Baishi became a famous name, his new and lively style and bold adaptation of folk artistic concepts alerted some traditional painters and commentators in the painting circle. They accused Qi for deviating from the tradition. Moreover, Xu Beihong learnt from Western paintings its realist style and combined it with Chinese ink wash paintings to create the effect of unifying figure and spirit. Some conservative painters and critics considered this rebellious. The paintings of Li Keran were

84


regarded as “wild, strange, and messy paintings.” The art master was once placed among those incompetent Chinese painters. Even the paintings of Huang Yongyu and Wu Guanzhong were not accepted by some cultural conservatives, not to mention the works of some younger painters who wished to reform the realm of Chinese painting. The same also happened to music. Heresy innovations were repudiated and rejected, but those banal and homogenous modes of folk performances were appreciated.

Cultural prejudice brought uncritical acceptance of traditional forms of art and indiscriminate rejection of new and foreign things. Such attitude caused great impairment to the modernization of Chinese culture.

Slavish Attachment to Existing Culture

The basis of cultural exclusivity was to prevent the discontinuation and loss of national culture. Supporters of tradition generally had a strong sense of mission. They considered themselves the only ones who were clear-headed and firm enough to protect Chinese culture in the tempest of Western invasion. But underneath this sense of mission was actually a deeply ingrained low self-esteem. Both the over-protection of old Chinese culture of these defenders and their participation in maintaining the status of old literature were perverted reactions when facing new changes.

Another factor that constituted the Chinese cultural perversion was a kind of extreme psychological imbalance caused by a peculiar consciousness. When communist literary concepts became more popular, people classified literary works by their class characteristics. They also considered literature that served less educated people the only literary embodiment of the communist principle. Literary works were judged by the taste and preference of illiterate or half-literate audience; whether a literary work was considered good or not depended on their appreciation. Popularity of a literary work became the standard to determine the literary value of literary works.

In relation to this was another kind of repulsion. What people usually criticized as “detached from reality” referred to forms of literature that were not appropriate for the common mass under a particular political climate, such as wars, revolutionary climax, and the Cultural Revolution. During these periods, some forms of art would be regarded as inappropriate. Many valuable cultural artifacts and artistic works were rejected. People believed that “art for art’s sake” distanced art from its function as social propaganda. For a narrow artistic mentality, the value of art only depended on its value as propaganda materials. Any art that could not be used in this way was regarded as spiritual opium. If an art work did not promote

85


mainstream ideology, it would be criticized as poisonous to society. The amount of art works condemned in the name of being inappropriate was daunting. Negative influence of such ecological imbalance in the artistic realm was also unmeasurable.

Many works that just catered to the taste of a particular community were not necessarily good or harmless. Folk art or activities such as land boat dance (paohanchuan 跑旱船), stilts (caigaoqiao 踩高蹺), and comic dialogues (xiangsheng 相聲) contained vulgar elements, but they were accepted as “proper art forms.” The folk performance “Zhu Bajie” 豬八戒背媳婦 (Zhu Bajie Carries His Wife on His Back) enjoyed long-lasting approval, but it would be ironic to say that only this cultural form could embody the right class position or artistic direction. People were unaware of the absurdity of this kind of claims and even promoted them eagerly.

Although traditional culture was a treasury of national wisdom, it was also the store place of cultural and art dregs. Critique of feudalistic mentality was most severe during the May Fourth period, but the mentality quietly returned afterwards. How many of the ideas in Sanguo yanyi 三國演義 and Yangjiajiang 楊家

將 embodied feudalistic moralism? People just promoted them without any critical examination. During the climax of anti-capitalist liberalization, it was ironic that people still allowed the spread of feudalistic mentality.

Primitive folk art should be a source of inspiration for artists. It should not be just idolized by taking up some political meaning. A more preferable approach would be to discover its essence and recreate it from a modern perspective. Wang Ping’s red earth pottery sculptures, “Yu” 雨 (The Rain) and “shanli deren” 山裡的

人 (The Man in the Mountain), lime sculpture “niubei hang de haizi” 牛背上的孩

子 (The Child on the Ox), and wood sculpture “fuzi” 父子 (The Father and the Son) were works that combined the regional folk art of the red earth highland of Gui Zhou, African art, and American Indian art. She was able to effectively personalize these primitive art forms. Wang Ping’s art was not folk art; she was an independent artist instead of the slave of folk art. The works of Wang Pang modernized the elements that she adopted. Her art was modern art but not ancient or folk art. We could see in her artworks the free psychological state and passionate liveliness of the artist as a modern woman. The works of Wang Ping awoke our latent primitive life consciousness and embodied modern people’s primitive life drive. Her art represented how a reactionary modern consciousness resisted modern civilization.

Slavish worship of primitive folk art was a negative cultural character. This cultural character colluded with moralism to aggravate the banalization of culture. Uncritical idealization and worship of foreign culture was an expression of blind submissiveness, but uncritical acceptance and idealization of the fixed cultural system committed the same fault. Fawning on foreign culture and flattering native

86


culture were both flaws of the Chinese cultural character. From the perspective of the historical development of Chinese culture, there was a lack of critical awareness of the limitation of folk art.

Criticisms on an over-emphasis on vulgar literary or art taste were usually directed towards popular music and painting. A strange phenomenon in China was that if a certain vulgar taste became a “national form,” it would be protected and allowed to propagate. In the lunar new year of 1986, the China Central Television broadcasted the theme song of “Jigong zhuan” 濟公傳 (The Legend of Jigong). The crazy monk danced and sang this folk song:

Worn out shoes, worn out cap, 鞋兒破，帽兒破

Wrapped in a worn out kasaya 身上的袈裟破

Everyone laughs at me 你笑我，他笑我

And a broken bamboo fan 一把扇兒破

Namo Amitabha 南無阿彌陀佛

… …

I like wandering, and being happy 走啊走，樂啊樂

I will be anywhere there is injustice 哪裡有不平哪有我

I travel everywhere 天南地北到處走

The Buddha stays in my heart 佛祖在我心頭坐

… …

People mock my craziness 笑我瘋，笑我癲

Wine and meat pass through my body

酒肉穿腸過

Namo Amitabha 南無阿彌陀佛

The folk song was welcomed by the whole country. In kindergartens, small kids danced and sang “worn out shoes” together. In military camps, this song also became an unofficial military song for soldiers. In the lunar new year of 1987, in a concert that featured famous Shanghai singers, the last program was performed by well-known actor, Zhu Wenhu, who played the role Ma Hongliang in “Haigang” 海港 (The Harbor). After he sang “Dadiaoche” 大吊車 (The Large Crane) and “Fuqi shuangshuang ba jia hai” 夫妻雙雙把家還 (The Couple Returns Home), the last song he sang was the theme song of “Jigong zhuan.” More than half of the audience sang together with the actor, their excitement was impressive to everyone who participated in the concert. This was a special cultural phenomenon worth

87


contemplating. The revival of Jigong in China was linked to deep historical and social causes. Although there were logical reasons, it was ultimately an absurd and perverted phenomenon. More absurd, however, was that almost all leaders and critics participated in the acquiescence of the phenomenon. If our cultural commentators were happy about it, then, didn’t the “nature of the mass” reveal a pathetic cultural character? Lu Xun once said: “We can only choose between two choices: either we embrace the ancient and perish, or we forsake the ancient and survive.”10 Lu Xun’s pessimism and radicalism originated precisely in his insightful understanding of Chinese culture.

Destruction Manipulated as Construction

China’s cultural character was influenced by a certain social condition, especially the long-term control of leftist dogmatic policies and the critical movements brought by the process of communist social reform. The violent and destructive outcome of these movements was notorious throughout the Chinese society. However, people have not paid due attention to its negative effects on the formation of the Chinese cultural character. On the one hand, we did not carefully study and understand the cultural philosophical system of feudalism; on the other hand, we still boosted and upheld a critical spirit without proper knowledge of the subjects we endeavored to criticize. Such criticism in fact focused on the works of the New Literature Movement and intellectual realms that were heavily influenced by Western culture. These two aspects were generally labelled as the culture and literature of the bourgeois class and the petit bourgeois, imperialism, and revisionism.

The abundant tradition of New Literature was reduced to an idolized Lu Xun and the rest was rebuked and denounced. The critical subjects of those derivative literary critical movements of various political movements in contemporary China were the most cultivated and intelligent people of the Chinese society. These movements reached their climax in the Cultural Revolution, whose slogan was “to sweep away everything” and “to overthrow everything.” The Cultural Revolution regarded all cultural tradition and legacy as feudalism, capitalism, and revisionism that needed to be swept away and overthrown.

The movements and the Cultural Revolution formed a new cultural character: people began to judge the correctness of a writer’s or critic’s stand not on his theoretical creativity and practice but his destructiveness, that is, whether he could spot destructive possibilities in the creation of other writers or critics. Moreover, he was also required to perform the destruction in an unusually extreme manner, proving his loyalty to the mass by severely criticizing the oppressed writer or work. Most of these critics performed the criticism on their own will, although

88


some others did not.During those days, a guiding academic policy claimed that “destruction is

construction” and “things should be destroyed before reconstructed”—such beliefs aimed at cultivating a cultural character of destruction. For a long time before and after the Cultural Revolution, destruction was generally promoted in all Chinese cultural realms, including literature. The situation was also incited by public opinions and spread across the whole society. People considered destruction some praiseworthy achievement. People who engaged in this kind of destruction felt honored but not ashamed. People endeavored to protect themselves, developed a political career, or betray people by criticizing others.

The large-scale criticism that accompanied the political movements was normalized even during times when political movements did not take place. When people got used to the idea that “destruction is construction,” the development of literature suffered from uncritical criticism. People gradually developed a kind of reflex action against literature and art—they looked at these works with a skeptic, demanding, malicious, and hostile attitude and attempted to destroy the works. Such attitude destroyed not only the feeling and atmosphere for artistic creation but also the good social environment for nurturing artistic creation. Writers and artists lived in fear of destruction and were hostile to each other.

The abnormal atmosphere directly bred a destructive cultural character. As literary and artistic creation would bring misfortune while destructive criticism would bring superiority and practical benefits. People were eager to become “pioneers” and “heroes” of the mass but refused to work innovatively for literature. This was not only a disastrous cultural destruction but also the beginning of a vicious circle. The literary construction of several generations was severely distorted. The serious consequences are still influential today even though the Chinese society has changed. Some critics are still hostile to literary and artistic innovations that they are not familiar or do not agree with. They cling to the critical mentality, in terms of both their ways of thinking and language habits.

Homogeneity and the Lack of Creative Spirit

The formation of the negative cultural character of the Chinese could be attributed to a series of historical and realistic factors. A most serious outcome of the expression of the negative cultural character was that, literature, a spiritual realm which should be the most individualized, was controlled by an imposing atmosphere of collectivity. Free expression of personal talent and inspiration and innovative artistic activities became regulatory compliance and cautious production of words.

89


The most extreme phenomenon was the appearance of “model operas”: all literary creation could only be produced by applying a fixed model form. “Model operas” were said to “have been molded for dozens of years”—the metaphorical expression referred to a workshop-style collective labor, which “molded” all unique artistic elements into a homogenous “model” which became the official form. All so-called “transplantation” and “learning” were actually different forms of “copying.” The strict regulation directly caused the shrinking of creativity.

However, it would be a reductive approach to attribute this cultural pathology completely to the model operas of the Cultural Revolution. Seeking homogeneity was not an incidental phenomenon as it was a generic weakness in Chinese cultural thinking. Successive rulers of the ancient empire governed society by applying a normative thought and moral control so as to maintain the empire’s unification. The control was effective for the unification of the regime and the assimilation of culture. It was a prominent Chinese phenomenon that the long-term feudalistic society had formed an integrated political and ideological structure that was almost impossible to be uprooted completely. Jin Guantao pointed out:11

The concept of integration was proposed from the perspective of social organization. Integration implied the connection of the organizational capacity of ideological structure with the organizational power in political structure, forming a powerful organizational strength. The bureaucratic institution was the embodiment of such organizational strength. Since the bureaucratic institution of the feudalistic society of China was formed by Confucian scholars, they effectively united the ideological with the political, forming the integrated structure.

The passage aptly described the close connection between culture and politics in the feudalistic society of China. The essence of the grand unification was culture in service to politics. The political quality of “being loyal to the emperor and protective to the people” of the grand unification determined the cultural quality of “serving the community and caring for society.” The marriage of cultural identification and political identification promoted the persistence of the conservative cultural character.

The termination of the feudalistic age did not eliminate the cultural inheritance. In new social situation, this cultural inheritance combined with new political condition and became a new character of grand unification. Even though the system of Confucian scholars as the nexus of politics and culture disappeared, the conservative cultural character of traditional Chinese intellectuals was still present in new writers and artists. It also determined and influenced the development of

90


Chinese literature.Because of the mentality of cultural vigilance formed under certain social

conditions, the cultural character became a negative attitude—people preferred conforming to the majority instead of taking a different individual path. Cultural and political identification and the conformist homogeneity formed under certain special political environment contributed to the chronic problem in the practice and criticism of Chinese literature in the 20th century. This greatly destroyed the innovative and free spirit that was normally required for the development of art. Art lost its creativeness and life and became a spiritless, empty body.

91


Distancing: Rebel against the OrderThe Resistance from Rebellious Mentality

A changing era brought up a group of literary writers and critics who were shaped according to the model image of social thinkers. They were socially responsible intellectuals who concerned for the country and the people. The writing and personality of these writers showed indisputable greatness in a chaotic society, especially when compared to the greedy, corrupted, muddle-headed, and ignorant crowds.

It was a valuable quality to do what one knows is impossible. These intellectuals mostly complied with the creative principle of realism, and intervened in social life through writing. They believed literature was for life’s sake. They were aware that under the social situation at that time, realism could only be a proposition but not real practice, but they still pursued it with an idealistic perseverance. They endeavored to reform the backwardness of society and resist the encroachment of darkness through writing. Their attitude towards literature was equivalent to their attitude towards life. They regarded ancient sages as their role models and chose literature as their life path. They attempted to make changes in society and educated the people by using literature as their tool.

These intellectuals had forgotten a historical fact when they embraced the virtue of traditional Chinese literati: the order and value that constructed throughout the thousands of years in the Chinese society were not moveable or changeable by angry scholars and intellectuals within a short time. Intellectuals could enhance the existing social mechanism with their knowledge but could not rebel against it; rebellion would be considered an offense by the public. When realism was used to praise and fortify the existing social order, it was welcomed by people. But when it was pursued in accordance with its basic principle, that is, to reveal the dark side of society, the society under the existing political order would react against it, resulting in disastrous consequences to the life of these progressive intellectuals.

The situation of the intertwining between literature and real social life from the 1950s to the late 1970s was a rare case in the history of Chinese literature. There were many historical reasons for it. First, Chinese literature inherited the Confucian literary tradition that literature should convey aspirations and morals. Chinese writers’ understanding of literary values was developed based on the

92


belief that literature should engage in social issues. To use Bai Juyi’s words, writers should “use poetry to inspect social and political affairs” and “use poetry to reveal people’s feelings.”12 Literature should be “for the emperor, for the ministers, for the people, for things. It is written for human issues but not for itself.”13 This has been the orthodox view that dominated literature throughout the Chinese history, its origin was in the Confucian doctrine: “A man who can recite three hundred pieces of poetry by heart, but who, when the conduct of the affairs of a nation is entrusted to him, can do nothing, and who, when sent on a public mission to a foreign country, has nothing to say for himself–although such a man has much learning, of what use is it?”14 We can see that traditional Chinese view of literature has always emphasized the practical aspect of literature.

Traditional Confucian literary view was later combined with imported revolutionary literary thought, which required literature to serve society and class struggle. To reflect and to intervene were the two literary purposes upheld by Chinese intellectuals and they echoed the practical literary thought of Confucianism. After the 1950s, this literary thought, which was constituted by the oldest and the most authoritative ideas, led to a widely influential despotic situation. Literature became a tool for social struggle and was required to embody the need of politics and represent its interest. Any writer who did not comply with this was considered a heretic. Literature lost its autonomy to political regulations. The destructive consequences of the attachment are still influential today. The literary abnormality and the tragedy it brought became a part of writers’ unconsciousness and brewed the later literary rebellion.

Although there was a clear direction in the development of the contemporary Chinese literary trend, different from the previous periods, this direction was not sought at the expense of the elimination of any particular literary form or style. It allowed the coexistence of different literary views—except for those unaccepted by readers and left the pool because of their incompetence. Traditional literary view that emphasized social utilitarian purposes was still a strong major opinion, but it was besieged by other strands of literary reflections, including those that questioned and challenged the basis of the view. At the same time, a rebellious mentality brought waves of low profile artistic reforms. This was the most important literary phenomenon from the late 1970s to the late 1980s.

Attenuation—A Moderate Distance

The phenomenon was literature’s distancing. “Distancing” was the opposition of “attaching.” When literature attached to other things, it lost its own uniqueness,

93


even though such attachment might be reasonable or advantageous. But in the 20th century, contemporary Chinese literature, from saving the nation to being a battle tool, from empty slogans to delusive education, experienced a process of transformation from normality to abnormality because it was subjected to something external to literature itself.

As contemporary Chinese literature entered a new stage, there were more reflections on the mistakes and fallacies of society and literature. When some literary works still called for a direct confrontation with life’s blood and tears with a full sense of social responsibility and civil mission, another group of literary works endeavored to push the mainstream literary view to an unimportant position. This provoked the anger of some stubborn social critics, but the distancing of literature continued to play out in different manners. Regardless the unpredictability of the changes, rebelling against existing order was a major tendency. These new literary trends mostly showed an obvious effort in distancing themselves from social reality.

Literature’s distancing tendency resisted the existing order with a spirit of challenge. Readers and critics who were already familiar with closely relating literature and political purposes or class movements were baffled by this. They were uneasy about the strangeness of literature, but these new literary trends continued to promote new attitudes.

The most eye-catching phenomenon among the changes in the literary circle was literature’s use of “attenuation.” The content of attenuation was very broad, including the attenuation of characters, plots, and the narration in narrative works. We can see that there was a particular purpose of this development, that is, it showed an attitude of contempt to the mainstream literary writing principle that had dogged the literary circles for decades. It questioned the superior position of realism as the most recognized literary style.

In the past, every fiction work had to comply with the mainstream theoretical principle, even if it was a short story. All fiction works should have human characters that were typically portrayed; the environment where they situated in should also be typical. Characters should show their personalities in regulated environment. When literary dogmas were the most prevalent, the images of characters were categorized according to their social class. Literature should endeavor to portray honorable heroes. Heroes were accompanied by various other characters that could show the greatness of the heroes by contrast. It was forbidden for literature to describe mediocre people, although these people were the majority in real life. At that time, good people should be absolutely good and perfect, while bad people should be absolutely bad in literature—all characters followed stereotypical understandings.

“Attenuation” refers to a different manner of literary representation. It

94


deliberately kept a distance from being too heavy and deep—both were the general tone of literature infused with sentimentalism. This also encompassed a strong rebellious consciousness. What this kind of literature attenuated was not only the concept and principle of realism or the literary phenomena expressed because of the prevalence of realism, but the passionate grip of politics on literature. It tried to maintain a reserved distance from society, distinguishing itself from literature that showed strong social awareness. Literature of the new era no longer subjected itself to other values. It no longer desired to be the weapon of someone else.

This is not saying that contemporary Chinese writers forsook social consciousness and their sense of mission all together, instead, they were discontented that literature had been placed in a subjugated position. This also by no means implies that Chinese literature denounced its utilitarian value. Some literary works only hid their utilitarianism, or expressed it indirectly. In contemporary Chinese literature, poetry showed this tendency the earliest. One of the goals of the Misty Poetry Movement was to express opposition to direct manifestation. Not only did it give up direct description in terms of the form (as it basically used montages of images), but also oppose propaganda in terms of the content. Despite all these however, we are still able to find strong emotions of the time such as perplexity, a sense of crisis, and anxiety in the works of this generation of poets.

Today, even the most lenient writers and readers would despise those works written in stark propaganda-style. This indicated that the literary circle had learnt from its past mistakes. There were various causes that contributed to such a change, such as the mentality of writers changed in accordance with the social progression and the appearance of new subject matters, but distancing as a positive rebellion to existing order was a conscious act. It was not an isolated behavior of individual writers but a general change in the writings of many writers without consensus. In this new historical stage, one of the most heated topics in the development of poetry was the issue of self-expression. Although this was an old literary topic, it became the most heterodox challenge in contemporary Chinese literature. This showed writers’ desire to rebel against the long-term suppression of individual consciousness by collective consciousness. It was a necessity to undermine the old order so as to build a new order.

Inward-turning and the Spirit of Rectification

Another phenomenon that was closely related to “attenuation” was the “inward-turning” of contemporary Chinese literature. This was a new discussion topic that ignited a heated contention. Critics captured an important phenomenon of the development of literature at that time: writers attempted to change their original

95


perspective and wrote from the perspective of the inner sense and experience of characters. This constituted the psychological time and space of the literary works. Fictional writings became more psychological, emotional, poetic, and lyrical. Fiction was less narrative but more psychologically realistic. New fiction sacrificed some external things in exchange for more “inner freedom.”15 Commentators recognized that Misty Poetry and “three-absence fiction” (the absence of plot, characters, and theme) represented the inward-turning tendency of contemporary Chinese literature.

Literary creation turned its attention from external socio-political issues to human inner conflicts. As literature turned its interest from objective reality to subjective reality, there was also a shift from passive reflection of the reality to active creation of the reality. This rebellion against existing literary order led to the emergence of a new order of literary development. The result was obvious, but people held different understandings and judgements about it. Many people worried about this trend, which was not surprising, for contemporary Chinese literature had been regulated by collective social consciousness, the life of workers, peasants, and soldiers, and the principle of class struggle instead of the individual consciousness of writers, the inner lives of writers, and the inner human universe.

People who lived too long in a fixed order would become unaware of the restraints of that order. In contrast, they were exceptionally sensitive to intentions to break off the restraints. Commentators who worried about literature’s inward-turning tendency repeatedly emphasized the basic statement of Marxist philosophy:16

Putting too much emphasis on characters’ inner universe will fall short of the representation of the external world. Its pursuit of reality will be fake and artificial. These writers who aspire to achieve richness and profundity will only end up with monotone and shallowness. The writers’ effort to reflect the external world through the inner feeling and experience of characters is destined to be in vain.

This critic further expressed his warning that literature should beware of the inward-turning tendency:17

As an indispensable component of the construction of the civilization of socialism, literature of the new era should serve the general goal of enhancing the moral, scientific, and cultural qualities of Chinese people. Writers should face life directly, describe the reality objectively, and passionately reflect and praise the current reform, represent sincerely the richness and complexity of different people of the reform era.

96


Distancing and anti-distancing co-existed in conflict in this stage of contemporary Chinese literature. The inward-turning of literature was a rectification to the long-term negligence of people’s inner world: the spiritual communication and emotions of human beings. The intervention of psychology in literature enabled literature to discover the vast realm of the subconscious and unconscious. It also brought new possibilities of expressions for literature.

No doubt that literature should pay attention to the existence and changes of the objective world, because the value of literature is closely related to its representations of real lives and movements. However, the abnormality that literature suffered was not due to this external pursuit of literature, but its avoidance to explore the subjective inner world as a result of focusing too much on the outside world. For a long time, critics categorized all literary representations of the human soul, spirit, and the mental activities of the consciousness under “idealism.” Critics who believed in mechanical materialism and vulgar sociology regarded literature as a purely material activity. They neither concerned nor comprehended the feelings in writers’ creative activities and the fluidity of emotions. They thought literature could only make mechanical imitations and depictions of the external world. From their perspective, the best literary production should reflect and represent accurately the external reality, but the invisible and mystic aspects of human beings and the world were violently precluded, even though these have existed for a long time in the human history.

Literature moved towards the inner world and the spiritual universe. On the one hand, this signified literature’s distancing from those aspects that it previously attached to; on the other hand, it was also a rediscovery and reoccupation of a realm that once belonged to literature but had been excluded for a long time. If we compare Wang Meng’s “Zuzhibu xinlai de nianqingren” and “Hai de meng,” we could discover the different focuses and the respective strengths of the different writing stages of the same writer. The former unfolded the life of a committee which had busy affairs to handle but worked with a lazy attitude. It was presented through Zhao Huijiu’s family weekend conversation, the conversation of Liu Shiwu and Lin Zhen in a wonton shop in a rainy evening, the plot layout, and portrayal of a few characters. It unfolded moving pictures of the particular social environment and mood of 1956. On the contrary, the latter was an interception of the psychological activities of an old cadre official who lived in a coastal sanatorium. Mixed with nightmarish memories and regretful feelings of lost youth, the story presented a complicated psychological exploration. There was barely conversations between characters and no complicated plot but only the murmur of a solitary man. Language used in the story was very different from traditional narratives and implied a certain rebellion:18

97


But he felt something is missing. The sky is too vast. The ocean is too broad. The people are too old. Their swimming poses and movements are too monotonous. Courage and power are weak. The tongue coating is too thick. Poor vocabulary. Too much cholesterol. Too long dreams. The bed is too soft. The air is too humid. Complain too much. Too thick books.但他若有所失。天太大。海太闊。人太老。游泳的姿勢和動作太單一。膽子

和力氣太小。舌苔太厚。詞匯貧乏。膽固醇太多。夢太長。床太軟。空氣太

潮濕。牢騷太甚。書太厚。

By the end of the story the main character Miu Keyan had to leave finally. The perceptive driver who drove him off asked: “How’s it? The coastal is not very interesting, isn’t it?” (怎麼樣？這海邊也沒有太大的意思吧？) But the reply was surprising (and this was the only conversation in the story): “No, the place is great, really great.” (不，這個地方好極了，實在是好極了。) This was more realistic then the direct description of conventional fiction. It revealed the secret chamber of the heart, which was usually difficult to convey. Wang Meng’s new fiction largely adopted this kind of free indirect speech and internal monologue, while his basic tendency was not stream of consciousness. For what it’s worth, this was an obvious artistic rebellion against the old-fashioned direct description and meticulous representation of external reality in conventional fiction. The new writing style has gained a foothold in the literary circle after the active practices by many writers.

In Search of Historical Origins

A renewed interest in epic poems in the new stage of literary development was another eye-catching literary trend besides the literature of reflection. The emergence of this trend was brought about by literature’s contemplation on its time. Writers were aware of the shortfall of merely focusing on reflections of reality. Literature’s close attachment to reality might not solve problems of reality, and this ancient culture and nation also borne a heavy history.

There was a process for literature to come to realize this. When literature awoke from its former craze, its sense of historical mission and civil responsibility were also resuscitated. One of the earliest members of famous literary magazine of contemporary Chinese literature Jintian 今天 (Today), Jiang He, wrote new poetry that was different from traditional poetry, but his “declaration” was still “traditional” in a particular sense. In the first Youth Poetry meeting, Jiang He made a speech to the public: “the main character of my poetry is the people… I am with the people. I share the same destiny, dream, and pursuit of the people. I think poets

98


should have a sense of history and their poetry should be at the forefront of the time…My greatest aspiration is to write epic poems.” What Jiang He expressed here was still a conventional sense of attaching to the current reality. He did not keep a deliberate distance. Young writers who were skeptic and critical toward history were stunned by the learned old intellectual. Jiang He wrote a foreword for his serial poem, “Taiyang he tade fanguang” 太陽和他的反光 (The Sun and Its Reflection):19

Poetry is the nation’s soul. Very early I have the dream of continuing the mythological essence of Chinese culture to the present. I wish to include the solemnity of bronze sculptures, the antiqueness of bricks and tiles, the weightiness of tomb sculptures, and the elegance of porcelain in poetry. I am in awe when facing art. The highest realm for poetry is harmony with its organic movements. It would be great if I am able to stay in this mentality for a while.

The change from claiming that poetry “should be at the forefront of the time” to wishing to stay in the poetry of historical harmony revealed the emergence of a desire to search for historical origins and keep a distance from reality through history. There were complex reasons for the appearance of the Xungen Movement (xungen wenxue 尋根文學), but one of them was certainly the rebellious mentality against the past situation of literature’s subjugated position. Because of a sense of antipathy towards politics and social concerns, as well as the regret for people’s deficient cultural awareness, writers engaged in writing works that explored their cultural origins.

Writers who came from a multi-cultural background began to ask questions concerning cultural origins. At the beginning of Han Shaogong’s essay, “wenxue de gen” 文學的“根” (The Root of Literature), he wrote:20

Where has the beautiful Chu culture gone?… The Confucius and Guan Yu were from the North, and Siddhartha was from India. As for the historical Changsha, it has become a city of revolution. We can rarely see other relics besides the remains of the Xinhai Revolution and the land reform movement. When and where did the deep and vast Chu culture dried up and disappear?

We should notice the intention of questioning this cultural loss instead of the content of the questioning itself. The desire to search for a lost primitive culture and the disappointment of the barrenness of the present wilderness conveyed a

99


sense of anti-realism.This was a critique of the cultural loss and cultural deficiency in the literary

circle. For example, Zheng Yi wrote in his essay, “kuayue wenhua duanliedai” 跨越文化斷裂帶 (Transcending the Cultural Fault):21

In my fiction, I could not find much cultural flavor…. I realized that I lack a holistic understanding of our national culture…. Feeling ashamed, I reflected upon the problem and discovered that no matter how hard I tried to recall, I did not see any systematic education of national culture in my generation…. In recent years, when I conversed with my friends, coincidently we all talked about the May Fourth Movement in a disrespectful manner. Although it was true that May Fourth brought vitality to our nation, the intellectuals at that time also denied the value of traditional Chinese culture. It was equally true that they disconnected our national culture.

A Cheng also expressed a similar meaning in “Wenhua zhiyue zhe renlei” 文化制

約著人類 (Culture Restrains People): “The May Fourth Movement’s contribution to the progression of social reform was undeniable, but its nihilistic attitude towards culture and the social upheavals of China have created a cultural fault that persisted up till now.”22

When many people attempted to shake off the influence of traditional culture, the above discussions represented another tendency. There was a sense of nostalgia and denunciation of the critique on tradition. This obviously different tendency could be understood as a necessary reverse when things went extreme. The Xungen movement distanced literature further away from social reality.

Different from the Chinese contemporary fiction written before, Han Shaogong’s novel Bababa 爸爸爸 (The Father) presented a world whose location and time were uncertain, in which a fool and his ignorant community lived. They talked in some old language that mixed classical literary Chinese and vernacular Chinese and lived a confusing and aimless life. They lived and died for no particular reason. But the fool still maintained his tenacious vitality regardless his suffering. We could only tell from the characters’ discussion on the strength and weakness of the nails of leather shoes that the story took place in a time where there were leather shoes.

This is a work of the Xungen Movement. It distinguished itself from the very concrete and realistic works by its representation of a distant culture. The abstract world in the novel compelled its readers to dive into the sediment of ancient history. This phenomenon emerged early in poetry. At the outset, New Poetry emerged in response to the Chinese social reality, but the trend had changed afterwards. The basic characteristic of this change was poetry’s distancing from politics and

100


society. Bei Dao’s “Huida” 回答 (The Answer) and “Gusi” 古寺 (The Old Temple), Jiang He’s “Jinianbei” 紀念碑 (The Monument) and “Taiyang he tade fanguang”, Shu Ting’s “Zu guo’a, wo qinai de zuguo” 祖國啊，我親愛的祖國 (My Country, My Dear Country) and “Hui’an nüzi” 惠安女子 (An Hui’an Woman) showed the change in these poets. Their later poems attained a sense of eternity by keeping a distance from reality. To use Bei Dao’s “Gusi” as an example. Similar to Han’s Bababa, we are unable to recognize the time context of the poem; we can only grasp certain implications in it:

The sound of the tolling bell dissipates 消失的鐘聲

Becomes a spider web in the fissure of the pillar

結成蛛網，在裂縫的柱子裡

Spreads as an annual ring 擴散成一圈年輪

There is no memory, stones 沒有記憶，石頭

Echo in the misty valley 空濛的山谷裡傳播回聲的

Stones, have no memory 石頭，沒有記憶

When the path bypasses here 當小路繞開這裡的時候

Dragons and strange birds fly away 龍和怪鳥也飛走了

From the eave they take away the dull bell

從房檐上帶走暗啞的鈴鐺

Wild grasses annually 荒草一年一度

Grow, so indifferent 生長，那麼漠然

They do not care if the master they serve

不在乎他們屈從的主人

Is the monk’s shoes, or wind 是僧侶的布鞋，還是風

The biggest difference that this kind of poetry reveals is the absence of social and political concerns. It has neither passionate outcry for a definite subject nor any concrete description of social issues. It only presents some indifferent images that bring about certain symbolic understanding. It is a rebel against the existing order, deliberately makes a radical artistic move by presenting an indefinite picture with indefinite purpose and emotions.

However, as some critics pointed out, although literature turned its interest to the ancient wilderness and old mountains and forests of traditional China, writers did not completely isolate themselves from human concerns. It was not an arbitrary incident for Han to write about a fool in Bababa, as we can see a distant connection between Lu Xun’s Ah Q and Han’s Bing Zai (the fool in his story). And

101


implicit in Bababa was also a certain critical reflections. While on the surface, Bei Dao’s poem “Gusi” was a tranquil poem, but its context was actually related to the critical reflections among Chinese intellectuals. Writers who tried to search for their roots and longed for traditional culture did not necessarily attempt to escape from real life.

Zheng Yi expressed that his pursuit was the freedom of art and thought, In the afterword to his novella “Yuan cun” 遠村 (The Distant Village), he wrote:23

I’ve written several works that belongs to what people usually call ‘fiction.’ It would be a bit pretentious for me to say that I know nothing about literature. But more precisely, I am still restrained by the idea of a conceptual literature that is not purely literary…. The misfortune of society and life made us precocious in terms of our thinking and understanding of politics. We feel unsatisfied with the plausible theories of the tradition and argue with it, we express ourselves eagerly in literature, but it concerns more with thoughts rather than images. All new innovations just fall back into the old idea of expressing morals by literary writing.

Even though Zheng Yi was aware of this, some of his typical “xungen” writing was no exception to this.

The most impressive message in “Yuan cun” was the idea that human beings were worse than dogs. In the area of Taihang Mountain, the narrator encountered a loyal shepherd dog, but it left the herd of sheep to travel a long way to look for its love. The author remarked: “this courageous and unrestrained character was a stark contrast to the distorted personalities of the two main characters in the story.”24 Zheng Yi was still being critical about the masses and wished to wake up the sleeping souls with his literature.

There were works that explored a world older and farther away than that in “Yuan Cun” and “Lao jing” 老井 (The Old Well). Zheng Wanlong’s story “Taoguan” 陶罐 (The Pot) was also a work that distanced itself from reality apparently. However, Zhao Laozi’s mysterious empty pot was in fact not “empty”—it was full of reflections on life. The picking up of an empty pot during a surrealist flood revealed an allegorical message about the nation’s destiny and the issue of cultural inheritance, which were still thoughtful social reflections that concerned the Chinese intellectuals.

As writers’ search for their cultural roots emerged as a response to their feeling of cultural deficiency in contemporary literature, it was itself a critical gesture to express their discontentment. It was common to see writers talk about their disapproval of the existing order formed by fixed ideas as described in Zheng

102


Yi’s essay “Xiangwang ziyou” 向往自由 (Aspire for Freedom). It was under this strong rebellious emotion that contemporary Chinese literature rebuilt a new order gradually on its literary ruins. Of course, this new order was something completely different from what it used to be.

The Emergence of Anti-Asceticism

Distancing as a trend of the era, its range was rather broad. Its impact on the existing norm finally stirred up disturbance and a widespread sense of anxiety. The all-rounded rebellion activities in the literary circle did not only concern a denunciation of conventional subject matters and utilitarianism, but also the conventional literary taste and style. When literature attached to utilitarian purpose, different styles were rapidly unified by a single style. An officially recognized style expelled all others that were different from it. Since the more serious literature was, the more educational it would be; gradually, literature rejected its entertaining and aesthetic purposes.

As a result, the style of literature became stiff. This resulted in a general rejection to literature from its readers. Hence the first measure to resuscitate literature was to change the stiff literary style. Under the influence of reform and opening up and the broad economic and cultural interactions with other modern cultures, literature denounced the aforementioned order after they were freed from previous restraints. This denunciation promoted a soft style in literature.

The gradual development of a soft style in literature signified a trend of anti-asceticism. The suppressed purposes of literature received renewed recognition. Propaganda as the only literary purpose was being questioned. Although cultural interactions became more frequent as economic activities were promoted by the authority, there was still a deeply rooted cultural prejudice in the literary circle. Class criticism and the mechanism of selection did not disappear because of the open-door policy. Therefore, the new situation brought new confusion and annoyance. Intermittent oppressions were imposed on literature in the name of politics. Society, including its literature and culture, had paid a huge cost because of these oppressions, but people still asked for and engaged in them.

A poet mentioned a tangible wall that separated the East and the West, but the intangible wall was harder and more impregnable. Whether it was tangible or intangible, it could not screen out the clouds, wind, rain, and sunlight, or the wings of birds and the songs of nightingales. The stiffness of literature, which was constituted by the politicization of literature and the emphasis on literature as propaganda, was attenuating. From Jin Yong to Chiung Yao, literature’s function

103


of entertainment was socially endorsed because of its commodity value. The rise of popular literature signified that literature had turned away from its hardcore political role. The authoritative position of literature faced challenges and the monotonous cultural machine of the past disappeared.

The “softening” of military songs was surprising and prominent. The emergence of this phenomenon could be traced back to Su Xiaoming’s “Jungang zhiye” 軍港之夜 (A Night of the Military Harbor): “The sea breeze blows gently, the waves move gently…” The strong and powerful melody of conventional military songs had become the dreamy, light singing. This was not an exceptional case. Li Shuangjiang’s “Shanshan de hongxing” 閃閃的紅星 (The Twinkling Red Star) and “Zaijian ba, mama” 再見吧，媽媽 (Farewell, My Mother) also presented a sense of gentleness that was usually rarely seen in the performance of male singers.

Two timeless military songs: “Shiwu de yueliang” 十五的月亮 (The Moon of the 15th) and “Xueran de fengcai” 血染的風采 (The Blood-Tinted Charisma) touched the heart of their audience for the tenderness expressed in them. People questioned why these songs were allowed to be released, but these skeptics should be reminded that there were complex underlying causes for the formation of this rebellious cultural mentality. It was a strong reaction to previous cultural suppression. People should recognize that the ecological balance of literature and art suffered from long-term destruction. The emergence of differences was an outcome of the rude imposing of political restraints on literature and art.

Destruction and the Reconstruction of a Balance

Literature’s distancing was a special phenomenon of the Chinese literary circle, but in fact it also followed the pattern of literary development. If the literature and art of a society suffered from long-term interference that is not relevant to art, or a particular kind of literature was supported while others were suppressed because of some narrow intentions, the ecology of literature would be destroyed. Consequently, because of literature’s rigidness it separated itself from its audience, it could only be sustained by attaching to politics but not be independent on itself.

Literature rectified this perverted phenomenon in its development. First, it had to rebuild the ecological balance of the literary circle. A critical attitude was necessary, so as a resistant force, and these resulted in the separation and distancing that I have described. In order to rectify the historical mistake, literature adopted a radical or even rebellious position. A positive outcome of this was the revival of the literary phenomena and practices that had been suppressed for a long time. The rebellion experienced tough struggle; it would not succeed if it was not supported

104


by the trend of social development. We should be aware that depoliticization of literature was a reasonable move to rescue literature from over-politicization, but if literature went to another extreme and became a self-enclosed ivory tower, that would be another kind of imbalance. The desire to search for the cultural roots of China as a remedy to deal with problems of the nation was a positive attitude, but if it actually represented a kind of escapism, it would be a negative attitude. Moreover, if “stiff” literature became indulged in “soft” entertainment and hedonism, that would not be a good phenomenon either. After all, the literary order could not be rebuilt with rebellious energy only.

105


From Modern to More Multi-Directional PursuitsThe Web of Order

Like a sleepwalker, Chinese literature got lost in the labyrinth of its strong tradition. The labyrinth was covered by invisible webs that restrained this sleepwalker who yearned for freedom. Tradition was a strong presence, but it was fragile at the same time. It was hostile towards any skepticism against it; it was cautious to any sign of disloyalty. This had become deeply ingrained in the psychological sediment of Chinese people. Any individual who stubbornly identified himself with the nation would react strongly against every invader. In China, it was a peculiar phenomenon that people could distort a nonconformist and mold him into a tradition supporter and tradition idol.

The criticism and reproach that Lu Xun received during his lifetime were not as disastrous as the idolization of this warrior after his death. People worshiped Lu Xun in the same manner as they worshiped the Confucius, to an extent that whenever there was a key moment of political struggle, people quoted Lu Xun’s writings out of their contexts for supporting their own views. These people just made use of his name to justify their destruction of the old Chinese tradition during the Cultural Revolution, such as “fight against restraining oneself and obliging to the rites” (反克己復禮), “criticize Lin Biao and the Confucius” (批林批孔). For a long time, no criticism on Lu Xun was allowed.

However, this could not be sustained in an era of thought emancipation. An essay titled “Lun Lu Xun de chuangzuo shengya” 論魯迅的創作生涯 (On the Writing Career of Lu Xun) was published in issue no. 8 of Qinghai hu 青海湖 in 1985, which expressed a different view on the life and works of Lu Xun. It attracted concerns beyond the literary circle. Different media published famous critics’ and commentators’ discussions on the author and his essay. Although it was debatable whether the essay offered a fair judgement of Lu Xun, it was already ridiculous that merely raising a different view of Lu Xun would attract such immense pressure from public opinion.

Almost no one could escape the order. The order was a confusing unity full of internal contradictions constituted by many remote factors and proximate causes in history. In the web of order, all of the recognized norms and conventions were seen as a kind of truth not to be questioned. In the 1990s, the poetry collections of

106


an important member of the Crescent Moon School, Xu Zhimo, were reprinted, and some critics published new reviews on them. But people expressed skepticism towards this because they believed the evaluation for the poetry of Xu Zhimo should have been concluded thirty years ago. When Zhu Guangqian commented that “Among Chinese writers, foreigners only know Lao She and Shen Congwen,” the comment attracted some vehement reactions. We can’t help but wonder: Why should people interfere with the right of a revered writer to express his view, which was actually a very mild one? What sort of a mentality could be so narrow-minded? It was difficult not to conclude that it revealed an ugly side of the Chinese cultural character, which caused the backwardness of this nation and society. Being conservative and obliging to existing rules was considered normal while expressing doubts to conventions and traditional norms was regarded as abnormal.

Traditional Cultural Mentality Being Challenged

Fortunately, the aforementioned situation finally had to come to face its own crisis. Along with the awakening of the era, literature also encountered a new situation, as Bai Hua wrote in his poem, “Yangguang, shuiye buneng longduan” 陽光，誰也

不能壟斷 (No One Can Monopolize the Sunshine), the “egg shell” that restrained the “awakened eagle” could no longer withstand its desire to escape. It used its beak to break through the thin wall, while its wings struggled within the web:

It will be torn down with just one push! 一點就破呀！

The vast sea of clouds, clear blue sky, 雲海茫茫，太空蔚藍，

Our wings can surge on the strong wind,

我們的翅膀原來可以得到

那麼強大的風，

Just outside this thin, transparent wall, 就在這透明的薄壁外邊，

Just a bit more force to break through! 再使點勁就沖破了！

We will reach an infinitely large space then.

我們就會有一個比現在無

限大的空間。

The eagle was awakened by the dazzling sunlight outside. It was once enclosed by darkness but now was tempted by light. The situation was similar to that in the May Fourth period. Various influences rushed in to flood the dark, old house. The Chinese cultural scene was filled with fresh air. Chinese writers were free to choose and learn from their favorite foreign writers. Hence, Bing Xin encountered Tagore, Lu Xun encountered Chekov, and Guo Moruo encountered Whitman.

107


During those days, our vision opened to the world and no one bothered to nag on other people. The freedom that people enjoyed did not bring chaos; instead, it nourished the Chinese literary circle. Writers and intellectuals learnt from different literary trends of the West, from classicalism to modernism. The import of Western thoughts and theories minted the aesthetic taste and artistic literacy of new generation Chinese writers. The Chinese literary circle did not become a colony even in this period of thought import. However, the situation was ruined by the interference of politics and the pressure it imposed on literature. This was an important lesson that we should learn.

Entering the 1980s, the Chinese once again casted their eyes upon the outside world. Our mentality already adapted to the general development of the contemporary world. The standardization of literature came to an end and we gladly accepted this new concept: “choices are the muse of art.” For a long period of time, Chinese literature was only allowed to learn from the communist literature of the Soviet Union, and this brought disastrous effect to the literary circle. When China once again opened itself to international communication, the situation of unidirectional imitation gradually changed. Contemporary Chinese literature sought more variety of influences. Chinese writers were inspired once more by the enlightenment of world literature.

The Necessity of the Approaching of the Modern

The enlightenment this time was different from the one that Chinese literature experienced during the May Fourth period, as writers consciously sought modern artistic impact from the outside world without trying to import foreign culture to dissolve old Chinese culture or assimilate with it. This could be understood as a new “New Literature Movement.” The nature of this movement was to end Chinese literature’s isolation from the outside world. The Chinese realized that they had fallen behind the progress of the world and it was necessary to open to the modern civilization again for the progress of the country.

With the implement of the reform and opening up policy, several important measures for activating domestic economy came into effect. Nevertheless, it was more crucial and urgent to deliver China from the yoke of modern superstition and empowered social discourses and ideology with more awareness of democracy and freedom. The goal of the turn of the 21st century was comprehensive social modernization. Literary reform took place in such a context inevitably engaged itself in the international modern artistic trend.

In order to argue that it was a necessity for Chinse literature to get connected

108


to the modern artistic trend, some critics made a direct link between social modernization and modernist art, but this was a rather reductive view, although many phenomena of the social reality of China corresponded to aspects of the Western modernism. The long-term chaos that the Chinese endured caused a general sense of loss in society. People suddenly woke up from the nightmare of a backward and autocratic traditional peasant mentality and were still haunted by the horror. Besides, economic destitution and spiritual emptiness constituted the cultural “wasteland” of contemporary China. This “wasteland” was different from that figured in Western literature after the world wars but the sense of desolation was similar. The pressure of life compelled people to turn to modernism rather than embracing romanticism with passion.

People preferred to plough on the “wasteland.” As many aspects of normal life were destroyed, people felt deeply their helplessness and alienation. They were caught in a sense of existential anxiety and absurdity; hence they no longer pursued a realist approach to portray social life and human relationships. This was the context for the similarity between China’s modernist literature and its Western counterpart.

The Chinese were used to live in a leisurely environment. Chinese people were contented with an enclosed rustic environment because of the peasant mentality that was handed down through many generations. They gained a sense of security in this static life. However, the collapse of this man-made retreat forced the Chinese to understand their desolate existence. They realized that the people of this so-called courteous nation could become ruthless and hateful to each other. They were desperate to find a way out of the moral and spiritual crisis.

Gu Cheng’s poem, “Yuan he jin” 遠和近 (Far and Near) depicted the sense of distance between people:

You 你，

Look at me for a moment, 一會看我，

And at the clouds the next. 一會看雲，

I think 我覺得，

You are far away when you look at me, 你看我時很遠，

But closer to me when you look at the clouds. 你看雲時很近。

Chinese writers identified themselves with modernist literature because of their experience of life’s abnormality and alienation in both human and man-nature relationships. Under such a context, the works of Kafka attracted the sympathy

109


and appreciation from Chinese writers. Metamorphosis became one of the best known works among the Chinese intellectuals. In Zong Pu’s “Wo shi shui”我是誰 (Who Am I), contemporary Chinese people also became insects crawling around.

Chinese writers and intellectuals were aware of the dissipation or mutation of their sense of self. They reflected on the backwardness of the Chinese nation and felt the urge to reevaluate the nation and its people. They believed that there was not enough criticism on the ugliness of the nation. They contended that it was necessary to examine the Chinese national character once again. Therefore, they became attracted to magical realist works such as Gabriel García Márquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude. They wished to regain their control of their destiny; their reflections on the survival of the nation and the challenge of the destiny of an individual were inspired by Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea.

Seeking Multidirectional Choices

During this period, Chinese writers read avidly the works of foreign modernist writers that were banned in the country in the past. Besides Hemingway, Kafka, and Marquez, writers were interested in Whitman, Baudelaire, Neruda, and Elytis. As the descendent of the Aegean civilization, his ability in combining ancient culture and modern art was greatly inspiring to contemporary Chinese poets.

For the circle of literary criticism in contemporary China, the strong vitality of Chinese culture and its power to dissolve and attract were significant. It was the foundation for Chinese people’s identification, but it also caused their strong attachment to tradition and convention. The mentality of the Chinese was not progressive—they preferred the old world to the new. Many people who strived for new culture still retained ideas and customs of old culture and ultimately fell back to it. In the New Poetry Movement, many poets who distanced themselves from ancient poetry picked up old poetry again in their older life.

Modernization and modernist literature were closely related but they were not synonyms. As literature moved away from standardization, it aimed at connecting itself with world literature. The weakness of Chinese literature was its antiquity. It signified both cultural depth and stagnation. Modernist literature brought new inspirations to this old cultural realm but also caused a certain commotion to it.

Poetry was the first to react to the situation with the emergence of “Misty Poetry.” Nowadays, it has become a common term, but when it was initially used it actually connoted a sense of irony. The controversy initiated by “Misty Poetry” alerted the literary circle and beyond, because it deviated from the traditional norm. It was not surprising that critics and other writers were enraged by it. However, the incident was just a beginning.

110


In 1982, several writers began their correspondences in Shanghai wenxue 上海

文學 (Shanghai Literature) and a few other literary journals to discuss the need to elicit a modernist trend in China. These writers included Wang Meng, Feng Jicai, Li Tuo, Liu Xinwu, and Gao Xinjian, as well as two senior writers, Xu Chi and Ye Junjian. They wrote essays to discuss modernist literature. Ye Junjian examined literature’s changes by placing them in the historical context. He believed that the human history had moved from the mechanic age of steam machine to the age of electronics. Machines replaced human labor; automation became the characteristic of the production of our times. Under such context, literature should produce trends, forms, and styles that were different from those of the mechanic age of steam machine. He thought that the foreign works that China published and appreciated still belonged to the mechanic age. The orders and number of copies that Xin Hua Bookshop received showed that some readers’ taste remained in the feudal age. Ye Junjian contended that: “A full understanding of the current trends and development of world literature, interactions with world literature, and participations in international literary activities are no doubt indispensable aspects of our ongoing modernization.”25 For this, Ye sincerely hoped: “As we are a large nation with 1 billion people, our contemporary literature should not stay dumb but make bigger sounds.”26

After he made some fair judgement on Western modernist art, Xu Chi commented on the Chinese situation:27

Many people among us still appreciate guqin, flowers and birds, ancient poetry, Kun opera, and the like, they indulge themselves in the past; they belonged to the school of the past. Some others are still unable to distinguish between the modernization that polluted the environment and the modernization that developed the four dimensions sophisticatedly. These people are satisfied with a passed modernization, but they do not recognize the most updated development of modernization. China’s modernization experiences an especially different progress, it looks like the situation of our modernist art will be no less different.

Several writers such as Li Tuo and Feng Jicai were greatly inspired by the message that Gao Xinjian expressed in Xiandai xiaoshuo jiqiao chutan 現代小說技巧初探 (Initial Explorations of the Techniques of Modern Fiction). Feng Jicai said reading this book was “like drinking in a glass of Tonghua red wine”;28 the appearance of this work was “like releasing a beautiful kite into the lonely and empty sky.”29 But the development of China’s modernist literature was just as Xu Chi predicted.

As the literary circle was alerted by this “beautiful kite,” some literary critics

111


and writers expressed concerns for the promotion of modernism and launched a battle against it. The controversy over modernist art was recognized as a “movement against spiritual pollution”. Many important figures in the literary and art circles expressed their stands. A revered writer, Ouyang Shan, said to a reporter of Xin Hua News Agency: “the current bourgeois liberalism of the literary and art circle is represented by modernist art.” There were two opposing views. Some commentators worried that a blind worship would result in the disappearance of China’s own voice, tradition, and character, which would eventually lead to a low cultural self-esteem and weakened national pride. Xia Yan quoted a passage by Lu Xun written in 1929 to criticize the xenophobia:30

Although there were border problems in the Han and Tang dynasties, the national strength was strong and people were confident with themselves…Whenever foreign things were taken in, people adapted to them freely and never worried. But when the national strength is weak, people become neurotic towards foreign things. Whenever they encounter foreign things, they fear that they will be conquered, so they reject them, worry about them, escape from them, and quiver together…

Shanghai wenxue published Ba Jin’s letter to a Swiss writer, saying that: “we are talking about literary works, I don’t see any crisis of westernization in this aspect.”31 The view of Ba Jin was the same as many writers who supported a more open attitude:32

With the development of modern transportation, the distance between places has been shortened. The interactions between the East and the West become more frequent. They influence each other, and learn from each other. This will definitely bring some changes. Even if there is a cultural competition, we should not fear that one culture will be assimilated by another.

The works on Western modernism writers and academia produced were at most some primary introduction to an unfamiliar artistic world. People’s fear of the threat of modernism on realism was completely exaggerated. The realist tradition of Chinese literature had been developed for several decades. If it could be undermined by some such initial import of modernism, that would just prove the feebleness of realism and the vitality of modernism.

However, despite the turmoil experienced by Chinese literature, Chinese writers’ and intellectuals’ free and autonomous awareness would not be ceded to

112


oppression. It is undeniable that writers, critics, and artists were participating in minting a new cultural character, which was encouraged by the open society. Its strength would be powerful enough to oppose the cultural resistance in Chinese culture.

113


Opening the Pandora BoxThe Formation of the Historical Rift

When Chinese literature chose to open to the external world, it had to bear the risk of doing so. Any changes might bring negative effects to the existing situation. New literary attempts were considered threatening to the traditional literary norm. People who were bold enough to make these attempts risked being punished by convention defenders. They were accused of violating the rules handed down from the ancestors. However, no matter how dangerous the situation was, progressive writers were determined not to change their direction.

Some critics supported the opening of the Pandora box. Once it was opened, the clash between two cultures—the western and the eastern cultures—brought another wave of shock after the one elicited in the early 20th century. For people who were accustomed to China’s norm of grand unification, this was like a serious earthquake that shook the base of Chinese culture.

China’s New Literature Movement began with learning from Western Romantic and Realist literary traditions. The two literary trends were rapidly assimilated by the New Literature Movement to form a new tradition for Chinese literature. In the works of Guo Moruo and Xu Zhimo we could see the influence from Romanticism, while in the works of Mao Dun and Ba Jin we could see the strength of realism. Lu Xun’s impact on Chinese literature was significant for his power to enlighten the masses. His understanding of Chinese ancient culture was the most profound, so his criticism of it was also the most acute. He knew the long-standing problems of Chinese culture well, so his desire to change them was the strongest.

The emergence of China’s New Literature Movement happened at a similar time as the rise of Western modernism. Many modernist literary masters were in their most productive time, some of them were contemporaries of Chinese New Literature writers. However, as New Literature was eager to make use of the power of literature to transform the old Chinese society, these writers were less attracted to modernist literature than realist literature. The rise of realism in Chinese literature accompanied the establishment of New Literature.

Nonetheless, the modernist development of literature also provoked the literary circle’s interest in new and unfamiliar art forms. For some writers, their interest in aesthetic effects exceeded their interest in social effects. Influenced by modernism, China’s symbolism and modernism also began to emerge. Li Jinfa, who studied in France, was among those earliest writers who learnt from Western symbolism. He was named “The Strange Poet” (shiguai 詩怪) because of his unconventional

114


poetic style. From 1925 to 1927, besides Li Jinfa, poets such as Mu Mutian, Feng Naichao, Wang Duqing, Yao Pengzi, and Hu Yepin also engaged in practices of symbolist poetry writing. For fiction, the School of New Sensations (xin ganjiao pai 新感覺派) was imported from Japan at a later time in the 1920s, beginning with the literary journal, Wugui lieche 無軌列車 (Rail-less Train) established by Liu Na’ou. Dai Wangshu, Xu Xiacun, Shi Zhecun, and Du Heng were contributors of the journal. Moreover, Mu Shiying also published his master works on Xin wenyi 新文

藝 (The New Literary Art). Works during this period portrayed sick social scenes of half-colonial cities through depictions of subjective impressions, feelings, and the unconscious, embodying the basic characteristics of modernist literature.

In the early 1930s, literary journal, Xiandai 現代 (The Modern) was established. A group of poets represented by Dai Wangshu began to promote modernist artistic practices. A new literary trend that promoted modernism emerged in Chinese poetry and rivaled with realism and Romanticism. The development of this trend was not at all smooth. After the 1930s, the Chinese society was in the grip of various problems related to the suffering of the nation and social crisis. The social reality compelled literature to submit to tackling social problems first. Literature’s purpose became restricted to representing human life and society with an emphasis on social utility. Writers no longer concerned with the aesthetic value of literature. Depictions of the personal and internal world of people in literature were considered unfit for the time. Afterwards, literature written with a sense of social mission that represented the realist spirit and new social utilitarian values was highly regarded and attracted abundant discussions. Since the late 1930s, the bias in the Chinese literary circle was constantly hostile to the idea of “art for art’s sake” for decades. Criticism on modernism coexisted with criticism on the corruption of capitalism.

The rise and fall of modernism from the 1920s to the early 1930s was a comet phenomenon of Chinese literature. Chinese literature voluntarily gave up synchronizing itself with the artistic development of the rest of the world (although this giving up was conceived as “progressive” in China). It walled itself up and travelled its own way regardless the pace of the world. Although some poets, especially those who studied and taught in the National Southwestern Associated University in the late 1940s, re-introduced Western modernism and composed modernist works, they only belonged to those art tributaries that barely received public opinion’s support—although the significance of some of these literary phenomena was reassessed several decades later.

Because of the harsh social and political environment it faced, China forsook policies that were beneficial to natural formation and development of art. Chinese literature followed ideas of communism and gave up other aesthetic pursuits to

115


propagate national and class consciousness. After the short term opening to foreign influences during the May Fourth period, China gradually closed its door to the outside world. Therefore, a large rift valley was formed between the prosperity of the early stage of the New Literature Movement and the long-term literary unification after the 1930s. The rift valley represented the isolation of that period of Chinese literature and became the potential historical motivation for China to yearn for opening itself up again to the art of the outside world.

Awakening: Question the Order

China left the 1970s with a complicated feeling and began to question the existing literary order because of its painful realization and understanding of the current situation of the world. Entering the late 1970s, Chinese writers became interested in Western modernism that was already out-of-date. It still brought new inspirations for Chinese writers who casted their eyes to the world again after suffering from a prolonged period of chaos in their country. The emergence of this phenomenon was out of an urgent need, but not, as some presuming critics believed, mere desire to catch the trend.

This internal drive of Chinese literature was quite similar to that of the Imagist Movement of English poetry in the 20th century. It was a movement that reacted to the prevalence of Victorian poetry in the second half of the 19th century. Poets’ felt an urgent need of a radical change in the context of the prevalence of decadence and this became the opportunity for the emergence of the Imagist Movement. The situation of Chinese literature in the late 1970s was similar. The Romantic style in Chinese poetry declined and became monotonous. These poems no longer expressed real human life and feelings, and their forms became stiff and repetitive. This directly contributed to the strong desire of poets to change the existing order.

In the Tiananmen Incident took place in 1976, people used ancient poetic forms to express themselves. This indicated that the existing form was already forsaken by people, but they could only adopt an abandoned form because new forms were not yet invented. However, the Misty Poetry Movement brought a radical change to Chinese poetry. Misty poets widely adapted Imagist poems that were close to Western modernism to counteract dogmatized realism and romanticism in Chinese literature. The motive of the launch of the literary reform grew out of writers’ skepticism towards the existing order and desire for a different world of art. The poetry of Bei Dao, Shu Ting, and Gu Cheng shocked the literary circle. Readers who were familiar with pretentious officially recognized works were suddenly confronted with this new style:33

116


The horizon is tilted 地平線傾斜了

Shaking, inverted 搖晃著，翻轉過來

A seagull falls 一隻海鷗墜落而下

Hot blood curls the large sedge leaves 熱血燙卷了碩大的蒲葉

That omnipresent night 那無所不在的夜色

Covers up the gunshots 遮掩了槍聲

– Restricted area －這是禁地

This is the ending of freedom 這是自由的結局

A feather pen is stuck in the sand 沙地上插著一支羽毛的筆

With a slightly damp smell 帶著微濕的氣息

It belongs to quivering ship sides and monsoon

它屬於顫抖的船舷和季節風

Belongs to the shore, belongs to the oblique lines of rain

屬於岸，屬於雨的斜線

The sun of yesterday or tomorrow 昨天或明天的太陽

Is here now 如今卻在這裡

Writing down the secret that death notarizes

寫下死亡所公證的秘密

In the beginning people were shocked, and then they were able to understand. Sensitive readers gradually recognized that these new combinations of images expressed feelings and things that could not be said in the past. Battered soul, complex and distorted reality, and people’s tangled attitudes were indirectly conveyed in these poetic lines.

Beginning with poetry’s modernist tendency, Chinese literature overcame the large historical raft valley to reconnect with the May Fourth New Literature tradition. This connection took place in a cultural context of different literary views. It also repaired the interactions between the Eastern and Western cultures that already began in the early 20th century. In order to save Chinese literature from its decline, writers once again imported foreign literary ideas to kindle new passions.

It was a reductive view to see the new development of Chinese contemporary literature as simply the outcome of young writers’ desire to catch the trend. Such a view in fact revealed the ignorance and anxiety of the viewers. The movement was not a direct transplant of Western modernism but an artistic reform that was

117


based on causes ingrained in the history of Chinese contemporary literature. It was driven by a strong force, which was the recognition that self-enclosure was actually self-destruction. Chinese writers’ eagerness to import Western literary ideas was more an embodiment of their wish to reconnect with the world than an interest-in-itself in modernism. They endeavored to end the separation of China’s literary circle from the outside world and seek communication and assimilation.

Wasteland Telepathy

As discussed in many studies, Western modernism was characteristic of its questioning of capitalist civilization and traditional value system. After the Second World War, disillusionment towards modernization and the widespread of spiritual crisis promoted the development of modernism. Social problems arose when a highly developed materialistic civilization experienced the collapse of moral and religious values. Social corruptions and the devastation of the world wars made people recognize the absurdity of human existence. In face of the wasteland of the human civilization, they hopelessly sought a spiritual homeland.

Modernism emerged out of this context attracted the interest and sympathy of Chinese writers once again. Compared to the past situation in the May Fourth Movement, there was a stronger motive this time. During the May Fourth period, China just broke free from the rake of feudalism. Urban boredom and skepticism towards capitalism were not issues of concern for China at that time. China did not experience the same historical change as the Western world did in the early 20th century. But decades later, even though Chinese literature’s modernism came late, it was based on a similar sensibility of that of the Western modernism—this could be conceived as a kind of historical telepathy.

After experiencing a whole decade of political turmoil and political suppression that lasted even for a longer time, Chinese writers woke from their nightmare and discovered the spiritual wasteland that surrounded them. The previous romantic ideals began to dim out and they had lost their directions. People felt helpless when facing phenomena of social reality such as rapid population growth, social corruptions, and the privileged class’ abuse of their power. Pathological social development was signified by a strong sense of alienation and solitude. People recognized the absurdity of their existence in the wasteland of spiritual crisis. The experience of China remotely echoed the social context in which the Western modernism emerged. On the one hand, Chinese writers felt that existing literary forms were no longer applicable; on the other hand, they found that modernism was the most appropriate for representing the social and human situation in China.

118


This was obvious in the change in style of some established writers. Wang Meng began his new artistic exploration with “Ye de yan” 夜的眼 (The Night’s Eye), “Chun zhi sheng” 春之聲 (The Voice of Spring), “Fengzheng piaodai” 風箏飄帶 (The Ribbons of the Kite), and “Shen de hu” 深的湖 (The Deep Lake). His untamed and disorderly narrative surprised his readers who were accustomed to the style exemplified in “Zuzhibu xinlai de nianqingren”. For example, the style of the following passage was not seen before in previous works of the writer:34

Large cars and small cars. Trackless trams and bicycles. Whistles and laughter, big cites only exhibited their vitality and characteristics at night, when sparse, eye-catching neon signs and barbers’ rotating lights were on. Some women permed their hair or had long hair. High heels and flats, sleeveless one-piece, smell of eau de toilette and vanishing cream, someone were unable to sit still when the city and women began to briefly dress themselves up. This was very interesting. Chen Gao came from a remote town of a remote province. One third of the streetlamps there did not light. Among those remaining two third usable bulbs, one third of them did not receive electricity at night.大汽車和小汽車。無軌電車和自行車。鳴笛聲和說笑聲，大城市的夜晚才最

有大城市的活力和特點，開始有了稀稀落落的，然而又是引人注目的霓虹燈

和理髮館門前的旋轉花浪。有燙了的頭髮和留了的長髮。高跟鞋和平跟鞋，

無袖套頭的裙衫，花露水和雪花膏的氣味，城市和女人剛剛開始略略打扮一

下自己，已經有人坐不住了。這很有趣。陳杲在一個邊遠的省份的一個邊遠

的小鎮，那裡的路燈有三分之一是不亮的。燈泡健全的那三分之二又有三分

之一的夜晚得不到供電。

People felt anxious about the new fictional style and reminiscent of the old style in the lyrical conversation between young Lin Zhen and Zhao Huiwen. The latter was replaced by the anxious sensibility and casual ridicule depicted in “Ye de yan” and “Fengzheng piaodai,” both revealed a kind of mature wisdom. The change in style of Wang Meng attracted wide concerns. News media began to discuss if the change was reasonable and deserved merits. Wang Meng paid no attention to these opinions. As a mature writer, he was aware of the problems of the existing literary order. He boldly took the step to adopt modernist techniques, although he did not forsake his communist spirit and realism.

Zong Pu’s “Hongdou” was a popular and acclaimed work that left a strong impression in readers’ mind. With the advent of the new literary trend, Zong Pu made an even bolder attempt than Wang Meng and wrote “Wo shi shui” after her prize-winning “Xianshang de meng” 弦上的夢 (The Dream on the String). She

119


wrote an eye-catching “strange story” with an unskilled psychological description. She applied the technique of psychological description to write a strange story in which people became insects: “Many insects crawled from all directions. Although they did not have faces, she still recognized her acquaintances…They were all wounded, stained with blood, but crawled solemnly.” (四面八方，爬來了不少

蟲子，雖然它們並沒有臉，她還是一眼便認出了熟人…它們大都傷痕累累，血迹

斑斑，卻一本正經地爬著。)35 The driving force for these writers to give up their original styles and take up describing the distorted and the ugly was stronger than the force of literature itself. Writers felt that new styles of writing were more appropriate and expressive for the uneasiness and painfulness of real life. Zong Pu’s work was inspired by Kafka’s fictional work. It portrayed life’s absurdity and metamorphosis on the basis of realism, creating a sense of awkward disharmony.

Moreover, the story of “Nizhao zhong de toulu” 泥沼中的頭顱 (The Heads in the Mire) conveyed surprising atmosphere of infinite boredom and numbness and a sense of eerie chilliness:36

Many insects crawled along the antennas: “When we are on your head, we are thinkers.” They shouted with their heads up. Their small heads were like bugs, as if they had worn a mask. When they crawled up a section they looked more like human. Some crawled rapidly, and their speed of change was amazing. Some fell off onto the ground as they crawled and disappeared in the mud.The head felt himself rotting. He must climb out of the rot. He opened his mouth wide, threw up the mud and shouted: “I have to look for the key so I can wash away the mud, don’t you feel uncomfortable here?”…The head was a bit complacent and wanted to make a speech. Then he saw a vague human figure. This human figure was erratic. It sometimes attached to different people, sometimes condensed into a person. A head dropped from the plate and fell deep into the mire.Ha! Laughter burst out, and this was the trendiest sound accompaniment when people fell.許多小蟲順著觸角往上爬。「我們爬到你的頭頂上，就也是思想家了。」它

們仰著頭大叫，小小的頭很像甲蟲，又像戴著面具。向上爬一段就變得更像

人。有的爬得很快，變化的速度驚人。有的爬著爬著掉了下來，攪在泥漿裡

不見了。

頭顱覺得自己正在腐爛。他必須從腐爛裡掙扎出來。他大張了嘴，一面吐著湧

進來的泥漿，一面聲喊叫：「我還要去找鑰匙，好沖洗泥漿，你們不覺得不舒

服麼？」…

頭顱有些飄飄然，想要發表一通演說了。這時他看見不遠處有一個模糊的人

120


形。這人形飄忽不定，忽而附在各個不同的人身上，忽而凝聚為一個人，一

個頭顱從盤中跌出，一直向泥沼最深處落下去。

哈！四周湧來一陣笑聲，這是看見人跌落時最時興的伴奏。

We could tell from the symbolic representation that some serious issues were conveyed through absurd depictions. The indifference and cruelty in human relationships were represented by the crawling insects that became human and disappeared in the mud and the laughter after the head fell off. Chinese writers eagerly borrowed artistic experience from modernism as they felt this was the only way to express their sense of pressure and melancholy.

The change in style did not just happen to individual writers but became a trend. It firstly began with established writers who originally admired the realist and Romantic traditions of the 19th century. Zhang Jie’s works revealed a sense of reminiscence of past ideals and the pain of losing happiness. Her early works could be accurately summarized as “painful idealism.” The painfulness in her works was represented through vile language and ugly things instead of the previous lyrical style that she was used to. This tendency initially emerged in “Fangzhou” 方舟 (The Ark), while the indignation and weightiness in “Ta you shenme bing” 她有

甚麼病 (What’s Wrong with Her) left a strong impression in readers. In the past, Zhang Jie explored the beauty of human nature, but in “Fangzhou,” she focused on ugliness. “Ta you shenme bing” explicitly revealed her desire to examine the pathology of human nature. Zhang Jie was a realist writer, but her later works tended to be more exaggerated and absurd. She experimented to depict reality in the modernist style.

The Moment for Difference

The rise of modernism in contemporary Chinese literature originated from writers’ antipathy towards dogmatic literary content and expressions. Xu Chi called this pursuit the modernization of literature, which was similar to the Western Imagism’s reaction against Victorian decadence. The modernist tendency of Chinese literature aimed at undermining the fakeness, exaggeration, and emptiness of literature dogged by politics. From heroes to common people, from perfect role models to minor characters, from seeing the earthly world as heaven to realizing the alienation and distortion of society, all these bred new intentions of artistic creation. Conventional styles could no longer adapt to the reality that had changed tremendously. Modernism liberated Chinese literature from the embarrassment of unable to articulate the reality. It provided new artistic thoughts and strategies for Chinese literature that had become stagnate for a long time. This was significant

121


for the reformation of the artistic outlook of Chinese literature.Within the existing literary order, “songs of praise” were the most basic

literary genre. For literary art, innovative inspirations come from questioning old and existing things. Moreover, it was also reasonable for people to raise doubts about their life when it had become abnormal. Bei Dao’s “Xuan Gao” 宣告 (The Announcement) expressed a firm denial. Another poem, “Wo bu xiangxin” 我不相

信 (I Don’t Believe), was among the earliest works that voiced a deep skepticism toward social reality. Chinese literature has always been related to people’s social concerns and reflections; such skepticism also emerged out of the writers’ and poets’ sense of social mission. Contemporary Chinese literature of the previous stage endeavored to portray the progression and happiness of life that Communism brought to the Chinese society. However, there was a serious lacking of revelation of ugliness. The exploration of this aspect of reality undoubtedly enriched and extended the expressive space of literature, widened people’s vision and opened up a new realm for understanding life and the world.

The world of Can Xue was perverted, ugly, but inspiring. She was the writer who explored further the modern consciousness of Chinese literature after Liu Suola. Her works, “Shanshang de xiaowu” 山上的小屋 (The Small House on the Hill), “Canglao de fuyun” 蒼老的浮雲 (The Old Floating Clouds), “Wafeng li de yudi” 瓦縫裡的雨滴 (The Raindrops in between the Tiles), “A’mei zai yige taiyangtian li de chousi” 阿梅在一個太陽天裡的愁思 (The Melancholy of A Mei on a Sunny Day), and “Huangni jie” 黃泥街 (Huang Ni Street), showed how the ugliness of society could be depicted in a fictional world even though the works were not written in realist style. Perversion and abnormality forcefully implied the psycho-pathology of people. The following passage takes from the beginning of “Huangni jie”—although it is a non-existent place, the ugliness reflected by the passage is not unfamiliar in the real world:37

I came to a street where all houses collapsed. Some beggars lied on the street. I remembered that this was Huang Ni Street, but the old beggar said: “What Huang Ni Street? What year is it now?” A blowfly as big as a scarab dropped from his hair.Black chimney ashes fell from the sky like rubbish being poured from above. The ashes were salty, tasted a bit like sulfonamide pills. A kid ran towards me, picking the ashes from his nostrils and said: “Two men suffered from cancer have just died, over there.”I followed him and saw an iron gate. The gate was already crushed. A league of crows stood on the iron spikes. Pungent smell of dead bodies filled the air.我來到一條街，房子全塌了，街邊躺著一些乞丐。我記起這好像就是黃泥

122


街，但那老乞丐說：「甚麼黃泥街呀？今年是哪一年啦？」一隻金龜子那麼

大的綠頭蒼蠅從頭髮裡掉下來。

黑色的烟灰像倒垃圾似的從天上倒下來，那灰咸津津的，有點像磺胺藥片的

味道。一個小孩迎面跑來，一邊挖出鼻子裡的灰土一邊告訴我說：「死了兩

個癌病人，在那邊。」

我跟著他走去，看見了鐵門，鐵門已經朽壞，一排烏鴉站在那些尖尖的鐵刺

上，刺鼻的死屍的臭味彌漫在空中。

The ashes, collapsed houses, and crushed gate constitute an absurd picture. The writer does not attempt to represent or interpret anything but just created a symbolic world through the montage of images. Instead of saying that this world was a realistic imitation of reality, it would be more appropriate to say that it was a transformed outlook of the world in accordance with a certain psychological vision.

For Chinese writers, it was a new experience to write in a style that was neither realistic nor idealistic. However, this was after all a kind of transplantation. No matter how much Chinese writers admired modern consciousness, they still attached firmly to conventional literary beliefs. This was also true for the younger generations of writers.

The absurdity represented in Can Xue’s works originated from the outside world as much as the inner world of the writer. For example, the ridiculous “meeting for discussing the greening issue of a residential area that lasted for five months” (開五個月的會討全區的綠化問題) and the neurotic life that even an incidental noise would arouse suspicion in “Chaiqian” 拆遷 (Demolition) were based on real life experience. The old, moldy, ruined house full of bats and the tracking and apprehension of a persecution case in “Meiyou pigu de yinghai” 沒有屁股的嬰孩 (The Baby with no Butt) were reflections of real situations in China. This style was particularly appropriate for expression the wide-spread anxiety, fear, and lack of a sense of security of the Chinese society.

The reason for Chinese literature’s import of modernism was certainly not because the Chinese society developed in the same pace as the Western society but the development of the Chinese society was alarmingly backward. Different from the alienation and solitude that people experienced in a highly developed material civilization, the alienation and solitude of Chinese people was due to people’s stupidity and cruelty as they were caught in poverty. Material deprivation caused spiritual crisis. People were unable to live a life of dignity—they were only as pathetic as the rolling heads in the mud.

Wen Yiduo’s use of “stagnant water” to symbolize the deprived mentality of the Chinese showed an interesting similarity between Chinese literature in the

123


20th century and Western modernism regarding the writers’ concern with people’s spiritual crisis, although the two had very different cultural and social contexts. Lan Se’s poem, “Shengdan jie” 聖誕節 (Christmas) represented a strong sense of insecurity:

I always think letters thrown into the mailbox

總覺得塞進郵筒的信

Won’t be received 對方不會收到

Bicycles parked on the street 放在街旁的自行車

Will be stolen by someone 會被別人偷掉

The pressure-cooker in my hands 總覺得端在手上的高壓鍋

Will explode immediately 馬上就會爆炸

The television that broadcasts the football matches

轉播足球賽的電視機

Will becomes faulty 會出什麼故障

If I hit onto something 如果撞上了什麼東西

I will have brain concussion 那一定得了腦震盪

If she does not arrive by this train 如果這班車她還沒有到的話

I will be left alone in the world 我就要一個人被撇在世界上

Why a mature man 一個成熟的男人

Puts so much pressure 身上為什麼會有

On himself 那麼多的份量

The poet accurately represented the potential crises and sense of solitude of a Chinese man. Poems such as Wang Yin’s “Xiangqi le Jieke dianying xiangbuqi pianming” 想起了捷克電影想不起片名 (Remembering a Czech Movie but Forgetting Its Title) and Wang Shaolong’s “Chuzu qiche zongzai juewang shi kailai” 出租汽車總在絕

望時開來 (The Taxi Always Comes when I am Desperate) attempted to capture the helplessness of people who were fooled by life and unable to take control of their own destiny. Borrowing from foreign literature for expressing local emotions and sensibility was an effective way to open up a new realm of artistic exploration. We would be able to see the social distortion and abnormality through a lens that was already endorsed with meaning.

124


Seeing the Latent Modern Chinese Mentality

Modernism provided useful means for representing the contemporary Chinese mentality in literature. Some philosophical ideas that influenced the development of modernism, such as absurdism, life’s tragic consciousness, and psychoanalysis, aptly responded to concerns in the Western modern society. While the material civilization became highly developed, people’s higher spiritual needs were not sufficiently satisfied. Modernist literature appropriately expressed the sickliness of the Western society.

For a long time, Chinese literature complied with the principles of reflection and representation. Literature emphasized the depiction of external activities and environment, the construction of plots, the figuration of characters, and the design of their connections and disconnections. The narrative was after all a representation of an external process. People’s psychological activities and their invisible situations were largely neglected. Furthermore, as praise song literature always emphasized the bright side of life, the prevalence of this kind of literature caused an insufficient representation of the aspects of numbness, obtuseness, and stupidity in Chinese cultural character. The ironic style of Lu Xun was excluded from mainstream literature; as a result, there was less works that exposed the dark side of the Chinese in a similar way as “The True Story of Ah Q.”

As writers became interested in modernism, the above problem was redeemed. Li Tuo’s “Yu guang” 餘光 (The Remaining Light) and “Qi nainai” 七奶奶 (The Mother-in-Law) reflected the Chinese’s traditional mentality and their difficulties when facing new life. The elderly in “Yu guang” and Qi nainai’s cautious attitude towards her daughter-in-law both revealed the anxiety of old China when it confronted changes brought by the outside world. Chinese literature’s turn to the inner world was greatly inspired by modernism. In Wang Anyi’s Xiaobaozhuang 小鮑莊 (Xiao Bao Village), the lives of several families in an ancient village were depicted. With the story’s special structure, the inner emotions of people who were still primitive in nature were unfolded. Mo Yan’s “Touming de hongluobo” 透明

的紅蘿蔔 (The Transparent Carrot) revealed a soundless sensual world. It reflected the real world from a subjective perspective of the psyche. The artistic sense of Chinese writers became diverse and complex. The non-material world of people’s psyche and feelings was revealed in ways that were completely different from the techniques and styles of Chinese writers that people were familiar with.

The artistic transformation resulted in some subtle changes in the representation of traditional Chinese mentality. It recovered literature’s exposure of the perverted mentality of the Chinese represented by Lu Xun’s Ah Q, which was once forced to drop out from mainstream Chinese literature. The atmosphere and setting of

125


Han Shaogong’s Bababa were not unfamiliar but still terrifying. Bing Zai was like another Ah Q. While Ah Q deceived himself by seeing others as his “sons,” Bing Zai called everyone “papa.” Bing Zai was a fool that could neither grow up nor die like a normal human being. In the discussion on the quality of leather shoes between Jin Bao and his father, Jin Bao refuted his father: “The shoes of Mr. Wong of Qianjiaping have irons soles attached to the bottom, they make clear sounds when the person walks. Haven’t you seen that?” (千家坪的王先生穿皮鞋，鞋底還釘了個鐵

掌子，走起來當當地響，你視見否？)38 Jin Bao was a character that fused the image of a fake foreigner and Ah Q’s spirit that Lu Xun described: “When the young people heard that he was beaten, they went to ask him about this, but he always denied, and solemnly changed the topic: ‘This God damn place is too conservative.’” (聽說他挨了

打，後生們去問他，他總是否認，並且嚴肅地岔開話題：「這鬼地方，太保守了。

」)39 All of these reminded us of Ah Q’s so-called “revolution.” The mainland that was flooded by praise songs of “heroes” and “positive role

models” was exposed and represented by new artistic means. Chinese writers’ exploration revealed to readers the sediment of the traditional Chinese mentality that was formed through a long history. The suppression and perversion of Chinese people, as well as their wretchedness, were represented in poetry in an earlier time, such as Lan Se’s “Zhongguoren de beiying” 中國人的背影 (The Silhouettes of the Chinese):

Life is like the dusk that descends in the street

人生就像這街頭的暮色

So beautiful that I feel like crying for it 美好得讓人真想痛哭一場

When I am back at home you always say this in tears

回到家你總是含著淚水

對我說

Only the silhouettes of the Chinese look so old

只有中國人的背影顯得

那樣蒼老

The Chinese, sigh, the silhouettes of the Chinese

中國人，唉，中國人的

背影

They always leave in a hurry 他們總是匆匆地離去

Never turn their heads back 從不把頭回過來

Even at midnight, many weighty silhouettes

即使深夜，也有很多沉

重的背影在你

Move swiftly in front of you 面前閃過

This kind of discovery would be difficult to convey through traditional Chinese literature, because tradition required literature to convey morals and social missions. However, the adaptation of modernist literature encouraged explorations

126


of subject matters that writers were unable to touch upon in the past. Chinese writers could once more discover the corruption and ugliness of Chinese people, following the path that Lu Xun developed earlier in the century. Literature directed people to form more profound understanding of the mental burden, pain, and disgrace of the Chinese nation. Modernist art provided an appropriate way for Chinese writers to express their reflection and confession.

127


Unannounced RevolutionTracing the History

In the history of China’s New Literature, the literary revolution of the May Fourth movement was not only large in scale, but its clear and bold position was also greatly influential. Courageous revolutionists strived to undermine old culture and old literature. They imported ideas from the West for conducting their cultural revolution and literary revolution. They advocated the spirit of modern civilization to rebel again China’s feudal culture and literature.

In 1915, Chen Duxiu published “Falanxi ren yu jinshi wenming” 法蘭西人與近

世文明 (French People and Modern Civilization) in the founding issue of Qingnian zazhi 青年雜誌 (The Youth Magazine) (which was later renamed Xin qingnian). In the article, Chen expresses a critical attitude towards Eastern civilization and passionate affirmation of Western civilization represented by France. He asserts that Eastern civilization represented by Indian and Chinese cultures “has not evolved from ancient civilization, although the two cultures have entered the modern age, they are more like the remains of the old era.”40 Chen Duxiu points out that what we refers to as modern civilization “belongs to the Europeiod race, so it is Western civilization, which is also known as European civilization.”41 He believes that the modern civilization composed by the proposition of human rights, biological evolution, and socialism “is the best to change the ancient world and renew human nature and society.”42 In the same issue of the magazine, Wang Shuqian’s “Xinjiu wenti” 新舊問題 (The Question on the New and the Old) was also published. Wang claims that the real problem they face is that “the opposition between the new and the old is not strong enough.”43 “The new” refers to imported Western culture; “the old” refers to China’s traditional culture. While new culture respected freedom, rebelled against autocracy, and advocated constitutionalism, it is impossible for new culture to compromise with old culture: “the incompatibility of the new and the old is even more serious than the incompatibility of water and fire and ice and coal.”44

There were two major goals that the New Literature Movement strived to achieve. The first was the promotion of “living literature” through reforming the language of literature. Hu Shi advocated the replacement of classical literary Chinese by vernacular Chinese and believed that literature written in vernacular language would become the mainstream of Chinese literature. The change in the use of language for literature had unprecedented significance for Chinese literature. Pioneers implemented the replacement of literary Chinese by vernacular Chinese

128


on the basis of a kind of historical evolutionary view of literature. Hu Shi writes.45

We will make those “most beautiful essays of the whole universe and all times” fall from their throne and become “the monsters of Wen Xuan and the bastards of Tongcheng”!46 We make them turn from “the orthodoxy” to “bastards,” from the “most beautiful essays of the whole universe and all times” to “monsters.” This is our Copernican Revolution.

The second goal was to revolutionize the content of literature so as to promote “human literature.” Zhou Zuoren’s “Rende wenxue” published in issue no. 6 of volume 5 of Xin Qingnian was regarded as “the most unadorned and greatest declaration” for the revolution of the literary content.47 In his article, Zhou unequivocally opposes ten types of non-human literature, which included classical Chinese literary works such as Xiyou ji 西遊記 (Journey to the West), Shuihu zhuan 水滸傳 (Water Margin), and Qixia wuyi 七俠五義 (The Seven Heroes and Five Righteous Men). He makes a moving conclusion for his essay: “we also need to introduce foreign writings to enhance the spirit of our readers, so that they will be able to see human beings in the world, cultivate their human morality, and live a human life.”48

Hu Shi summarized the revolutionary value of the content of the literary revolution of the early May Fourth Movement. His summary positively affirmed the significance of the New Literature movement for endowing Chinese literature a more international vision:49

The members of Xin qingnian promoted this modest “human-oriented individualism” that provoked the passion of young people and brought about an era of individual emancipation. When we were promoting that idea, people were escaping from a cruel “non-human” war. The world was experiencing vigorous changes. Because of these changes, many systems and ideas were re-evaluated.

From the above passage we can see the revolutionary and groundbreaking spirit of the generation of the May Fourth period. They required New Literature to make a complete break with old literature with their new ideas and views. They judged traditional Chinese culture and old literature by placing them in the reference of a world vision and decided to forgo them in order to establish new values. People of the literary era were clear and determined in their attitude to exchange the old for the new. Their innovative spirit could be summarized in the following poem:50

129


I imagine the first human god, 我幻想著首出的人神，

I imagine Pangu who creates the Earth and the sky.

我幻著著開辟天地的盤

古。

He is the spirit of creation, 他是創造的精神，

He is the pain of production, 他是產生的痛苦，

… …

I have to praise this new-born infant, 我要高贊這最初的嬰

兒，

I have to praise the great self who ventures in unknown lands.

我要高贊這開辟鴻荒的

大我。

The audacity and spirit of the pioneers could be attributed to many factors. They imagined themselves a person who invented a new world. They felt anxious about the weight of their mission to innovate and the pain of giving birth to completely new things. It was a basic fact that the language of literature at that time was too old to adapt to the development of the time, and the backward content of old literature also urgently awaited to be revolutionized. The outdated old culture caused people’s antagonistic attitude towards it. This was a decisive break without return. In the history of Chinese literature, such a literary revolution of replacing completely the old with the new was unprecedented for its uncompromising struggle in terms of the form and the content.

Peaceful Repairment and Affirmation

After the end of the Cultural Revolution, the peaceful development of Chinese literature was unique in the whole New Literature Movement. On the whole, it was a stage of internal formation of New Literature. China’s New Literature maintained its nature but the initial missions waited to be inherited and completed. Although the Cultural Revolution created a significant historical cleft, but the mission of the stage after the Cultural Revolution was not to build another new system but to reaffirm the values promoted in the stage before. Repairing this cleft aimed at establishing a link with the May Fourth New Literature Movement, showing that Chinese literature was redirected to its proper track after a long-term deviation.

As discussed previously, Chinese contemporary literature had gone awry from the 1940s to the end of the Cultural Revolution, especially during the ten years of the revolution, due to many social and political reasons. Literature movements were no longer self-initiated but instructed by political imperatives. The most characteristic

130


feature of this was the linear development of literature that excluded all other non-officially recognized ideas and propositions. Literature’s variety was prohibited and literary works became monotonous. Different literary styles disappeared. Along with the promotion of revolutionary literature was the promotion of the superiority of realism. Highly related to the promotion of ideology, various types of realism became the only officially recognized writing style for Chinese literature. The state’s control over writers and intellectuals caused the barrenness of artistic style and mode in Chinese literature after the 1950s.

The politicization of literature and the promotion of a single style resulted in an imposing literary norm. The norm was stiff and inadaptable for representing the richness of life and complex human emotions. Literature that complied with rigid formulae constituted a literary spectacle of fakeness, largeness, and emptiness. Both Chinese and Western literary traditions were convicted, denied, and expelled. Literature became several “model operas” to instruct the people of the whole country. For a long time, the human aspect of literature was criticized. The function of representations of human nature and morality in literature of enriching the content of literature was denied. Dogmatic regulations on topics and treatments of emotions and atmospheres replaced lively depictions of the living situation of people. The depictions of characters in model works had to follow strict requirements. Heroes portrayed in these works were only perverted supermen and gods who signified serious distortion and estrangement of human nature.

In the ten years of large-scale criticism and burning of books during the Cultural Revolution, all cultural legacies were demonized and regarded as sinful symbols to be destroyed. Literature became monotonous and formulated. The disastrous oppression came to an end by 1976, with the advent of an age of openness and renewed communication. Chinese literature started to open itself to the outside world and came to realize the strangeness of the world that it had lost contact with for a long time. While forbidden books were allowed to be circulated again and more translated works were available in the market, international cultural interactions signified the end of the previous situation. Chinese people were alerted to the strangeness of their cultural nightmare and recognized its abnormality. Foreign literature was an effective influence to ignite Chinese writers’ desire to transform Chinese literature. If there was no such stimulation, the revolution of Chinese literature might need more time to start off.

We can see that literature that went awry must be brought back to the right path at a certain time through revolutionary means. Foreign references made available to people in an open society further motivated the change.

131


The Content of Construction

The literary revolution took place after the Cultural Revolution considered the rebuilding of the New Literature tradition of the New Fourth Movement its foremost constructive mission. It also aimed at undermining the oppressive forces that had restrained literature for a long time. The following basic goals characterized the peaceful nature of this revolution. First, the purpose of the new literary revolution was to ratify the distortion in the past and restore the normal development of Chinese literature. Second, as Chinese writers realized the ossification of literature, they were eager to revitalize it with a modern spirit. By endowing Chinese literature a unique modern consciousness, the new literary revolution attempt to reconnect Chinese literature with the present current of world literature. Third, New Literature was originally the outcome of a literary revolution against feudalism. Yet revolutionary literature became a politically distorted phenomenon, so writers desired to launch a literary revolution again. However, instead of simply restoring the previous project, this revolution aimed more at ratifying past fault.

The new literary revolution was also driven by the spirit of the age. If large-scale thought emancipation was not launched and there was no consensus on restoring society from political chaos, the revolutionary changes in literature would not be able to take place and develop in such a rapid manner. The constructiveness of social change determined the constructiveness of literary change. Literary movements were closely related to social movements in terms of their nature and manner.

The new literary revolution did not have a particular set of goals, strategies, steps, and methods. It was a derived phenomenon of social development. As the changes and development of society emphasized practicality, the changes in literature also valued concrete literary practices. One of the most prominent features of the revolution was that it was unannounced. It happened through real practices but not declaration. The political change took place in 1976 brought a new beginning to the Chinese society as well as resuscitation for Chinese literature.

The revival of Chinese literature had showed its revolutionary strength, and this revolutionary strength was presented in a quiet manner. Its constructive outcome was embodied in two aspects. First, literary writing and literary criticism were no longer subjected to political examination. This was a ratification of the distorted situation of the past, which curbed the vicious development of literature and laid the foundation for the revival of Chinese literature.

Second, the tradition of Chinese revolutionary literature, especially the tradition that literature should cater to popular taste so as to serve peasants, workers, and soldiers, was revised. A fundamental goal of the process of this revision was to revert and reselect the guiding principles for literature. The literary policies, literary

132


writings, and criticism since the 1940s were re-evaluated. The extreme leftist route for literature was repudiated. The greatest effect of this was the restoring, development, and deepening of the spirit of realism. Literature reaffirmed its loyalty to its time, people, and social life. To speak with sincerity was the distinctive proposition during this period.

Moreover, inspired and induced by a thought emancipation that questioned and denied modern superstitions, literature worked towards more epoch-making breakthroughs. This development can be examined from two aspects. On the one hand, after the political rakes on literature were lifted, the free nature of literature could be restored. Writers proceeded into dangerous grounds carefully, responding to the calling from their passion and sense of civil mission. As different forbidden zones for literary creation were overcome, writers were able to create different new writing stages. Chinese literature transformed from Scar Literature, reflective literature, to reformative literature. Although not all attempts of breaking through were successful because of various obstacles—for these, we could name the indictment towards social dark sides in “Jiaru woshi zhende” 假如我是真的 (If I Am Real), the critique on modern superstitions represented by “Kulian” 苦戀 (Bitter Love), and the reveal of society’s blind submission to the privileged class in “Jiangjun, buneng zheyang zuo” 將軍，不能這樣做 (General, We Can’t Do This), literature’s development still took its inevitable course.

On the other hand, writers’ struggle against tradition and authority and their effort to release literature from attaching to politics was paid off by gaining unprecedented freedom for literary activities. After the reflective stage of literature came to an end, the development of literature entered a stage of non-linear development governed by competitive principles instead of executive policies. Different literary trends formed different systems in a rhizoid structure.

Literature’s autonomy was the main outcome of this unannounced literary revolution. It not only caused some radical changes in the literary ecology in China, that is, executive policies were replaced by free competition and homogeneity replaced by heterogeneity, it also made literature extend itself to different arenas. Moreover, literary concepts were rebuilt and re-evaluated, as previous literary values and functions were repudiated.

Experimental Attempts Fully Unfolded

It was a new trend in Chinese literature that exploration was encouraged. Poetry was the first genre that engaged in exploration. The emergence of “Misty Poetry” was referred to as “the rise of poetry” by supporters while opponents called it

133


“cancer.” The name “Misty Poetry” was initially a term with negative meaning, but gradually it became a term that signified recognition. The success of the wide and profound exploration was the success of poetry’s revolutionary experiment in an organic manner. The poetic theoretical publication founded in 1980 was directly named as Shi Tansuo 詩探索 (Poetry Exploration). Later, the publication of Tansuo shixuan 探索詩選 (An Anthology of Explorative Poetry) and Zhongguo dangdai shiyan shixuan 中國當代實驗詩選 (Contemporary Experimental Chinese Poetry) also indicated the development of the bold exploration.

Poets undertook their explorations and experiments quietly and published poetry of different styles and trends which caused shock and unrest among people who were unaccustomed to new things. After some fierce debates or even attacks, people grew tired of the controversies and these opponents began to accept directly or indirectly what they opposed before because they recognized that these new things had earned many supporters. This was the process for non-mainstream styles to break into the norm. Contemporary Chinese literature repeatedly refused the entering of heterodox literary styles but accepted them later. The literary circle adopted heterodox literary styles and reformed them. The emergence of heterodox literary trends enriched and changed the literary order of Chinese literature. This was a literary revolution conducted in a peaceful manner.

In the Chinese literary circle of the 1980s, explorations and experiments took place in their full speed; these were no longer restricted to the poetry genre. The excellent result of poetry’s experimental attempt had already been acknowledged by people. In the history of Chinese New Literature, almost every revolutionary moment was initially ignited by poetry: the vernacular poetry of the May Fourth Movement, the political breakthrough induced by Tiananmen poetry, and the Misty Poetry Movement that began an organic literary revolution. Different genres of literature also joined in afterwards.

Besides poetry, fiction was also a genre that attracted people’s attention. From Wang Meng’s change of writing style to Zhang Xinxin’s conveyance of a modern consciousness, followed by the bold experimental attempts of Liu Suola and Xu Xing—each of these writers explored new writing styles that inevitably attracted hostile criticism. Liu Suola’s “Ni biewu xuanze” 你別無選擇 (You Have No Choice) and Xu Xing’s “Wuzhuti bianzou” 無主題變奏 (Themeless Variation) attracted censures from conservative critics. For example, an essay that disapproved “Wuzhuti bianzou” criticized its sense of absurdity and the image of an unwanted man. It even warned Chinese writers: “History is calling for the spirit of sacrifice and majestic disposition of various heroisms. I hope our writers will face their own moral responsibility.”51

However, Chinese writers had prepared for all the possible criticism. They

134


gradually adapted to the hostility from conservative parties. The growth in the popularity of Can Xue’s works did not cause greater stir in the literary circle, showing that the adaptability of Chinese literature had strengthened. Writers’ participation had improved the receptivity of people. Experiments and exploration were extended to wider realms.

Differently, changes in the wider art circle had caused some noise. New artistic trends that continued for several years attracted the attention of many people. A critic reminded people to pay attention to the positive significances of the changes:52

They wish to participate in social changes and promote the progression of society by using art as a means. They want to create a kind of painting that exhibits an international vision of the 1980s. To use their own words, they want to transcend modernism, open Chinese painting up to the world and gain international attention and recognition. They want to undermine old norms and old artistic modes so as to establish a lively artistic system.

For music, young composers and lyricists constantly wrote popular music that was completely different from traditional music to attract more followers. The popularization of songs such as “Rang shijie chongman ai” 讓世界充滿愛 (Let the World be Filled with Love) indicated that changes were also taking placing in the realm of music.

We can say that experimental attempts had become prevalent in Chinese literature and art. Artistic experiments took place in all realms of art quietly and peacefully. Experimental practices brought changes in a progressive and step-by-step process. The progress would not be stopped because it was unfolded on the basis of the awakening of the whole people. Chinese literature had made use of the opportunity to develop in a new way with the support from political and economic development. The progress would be a long and infinite process.

A Large-Scale Movement against the Old Norm

The above discussion focused on analyzing the differences between the new literary movement, which was peaceful and unannounced, and the May Fourth Movement, which announced itself publicly, in terms of their content and methods. The new literary revolution was a mild one because it aimed at restoring a previous tradition, and it emphasized exploration, construction, and strategic experiments. The new literary movement was restrained by conservative forces and unstable cultural environment. To develop under such great pressure, the influential revolution could only take place in a quiet manner.

135


The new literary revolution had to confront a unified norm that was politically formed in decades. This norm was once indispensable to maintain harmony for a particular era, but its power in unifying literary creation, taste, and criticism was also terrifying. The huge and all-rounded literary norm encompassing literary concepts, literary values, and literary expressions was formed within three to four decades after the New Literature Movement and had become a stable and rigid domination over time. The new literary revolution aimed at putting an end to Chinese literature’s isolation and opening it up to the outside world. It purported to change its homogeneity to heterogeneity and promote the participation of Chinese literature in world literature. This literary revolution renewed Chinese literature by modernizing it. It paid particular attention to the strengths of Western modernism and explored how it could empower Chinese literature.

In order to cast long-lasting impact on the rigid literary norm, new literary trends employed strategies of the “new, strange, and bewildering” to oppose “fakeness, exaggeration, and emptiness.” “Fakeness, exaggeration, and emptiness” were comprehensive descriptions for the worst part of the dominant literary norm. “Fake” literature referred to works that detached from social life and social ideals. They did not dare to touch upon the authentic aspect of life but just presented fake realism. Some other works distorted sublime ideals and vilified beautiful feelings with fake romanticism. “Grand” figures, “grand” scenes, “grand” ideas, and “grand” characters flooded literature. Literary works deviated from normal development with exaggerations, self-expansion, and deification. “Empty” literature detached from real social life and people’s real feelings; its content was hollow and vague. These three aspects were the basic targets for literature’s struggle against the existing norm.

The significance of this revolution was just second to the New Literature Movement that promoted the replacement of classical literary Chinese and traditional literary content and forms by vernacular Chinese and new literary content and forms. Both revolutions had to face strong opponents. The May Fourth New Literature Movement confronted the norm of traditional Chinese literature that was formed in thousands of years. The norm that the new literary revolution confronted had a shorter history, but it was no less rigid than the previous one. Because it was highly systematized and regulated by a highly unified socio-political institution and encouraged by a strong executive power, it was dogmatized by leftist assertions and became destructive to literature.

Resistant forces from conservative opponents were the main source of difficulties and obstacles for the promotion of new content and forms of the new literary revolution. Of course, this certainly included the self-aware resistance from the particular taste formed under previous political situation. The Misty Poetry

136


Movement of the new literary revolution deliberately disregarded tradition and the authority, and this indicated the poets’ dissatisfaction with the poetry norm and their desire to rebel against it. When Bei Dao announced his “disbelief,” we could understand it generally as his disbelief of the abnormal order. It distinctively represented a critical spirit towards the existing order. If we leave the core factor of this transformative literary period—its critical stand—we would not be able to understand the uproar stirred up by this period’s literature.

Despite the difficult mission these writers faced, the anti-norm literary movement driven by their critical spirit had become an influential and profound literary transformation. As a new literary revolution, it was similar to the literary revolution of the May Fourth in terms of its aim to undermine the existing norm. It inherited and extended the New Literature tradition, but its strategic consideration for the complicated environment in China also showed that its method of revolution was different from that of the May Fourth Movement. To be widely influential, it must have chosen to be an unannounced revolution.

Part IV

Post-New Era and Cultural Transformation

138


The Origins of the Concept the New Era LiteratureThe proposition of the New Era Literature, like the proposition of contemporary literature, was determined by social changes. The Cultural Revolution that began in the mid-1960s caused a widespread crisis in the Chinese society, from its economy, politics, culture, literature to art. The ending of the Cultural Revolution brought a turning point for the Chinese society. Initially, the term “New Era” was used in various political documents to refer to the Chinese society after the Cultural Revolution. A passage in the Communique of the 3rd Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China passed on 22nd December, 1978 described the concept of the “New Era”:1

The committee unanimously agreed to implement the policies that proposed by the Central Politics Bureau represented by comrade Hua Guofeng. The focus of the work of the Party and the people’s attention should now be shift to the modern construction of socialism in order to adapt to the domestic and foreign developments. We have to end the country-wide large-scale crowd movements of exposing and criticizing Lin Biao, led by the Gang of Four. This is significant for actualizing the 3-year national economy project, the 8-year planning, 23-year projection, the modernization of agriculture, industry, national defense, and scientific technology, and strengthen the proletariat class’ governance of our country. The overall mission for the New Era our Party proposes reflects history’s requirement and the people’s wish; it represents the fundamental interest of the people. It is the most concerned matter of all people of the country that whether we can fulfil the overall mission of the New Era, enhance the modern construction of socialism, and improve people’s lives and strengthen the national defense on the basis of rapid production development…

Obviously, the term “New Era” appeared quite early. Since the end of the Cultural Revolution in October, 1976, people began to use this term to distinguish from the old period before the Cultural Revolution. The Extended Conference of the Committee of China’s Literary Association convened in late May, 1978 was a very important meeting for the literary and art circle after the Cultural Revolution. It took place half a year earlier than the 3rd Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. Participants already used “the New

139


Era of socialist revolution and socialist construction” to define the new time.“New Era Literature” was derived from that. Although it was not the outcome

of the usual “political decision,” it still reflected the fact that literature was closely related to social ideology. In China, it would not be wrong to say that a particular kind of social situation would form a particular kind of literature. However, although social changes were basic and major factors, the proposition of New Era Literature was also due to the literary circle’s desire to forsake the old for the new. The Cultural Revolution was not a random event but the result of a certain accumulation and transformation. We can see a process in every historical event in China, from their emergence to their development and end. When literature was forced to a dead end, it yearned for rejuvenation.

After the end of the Cultural Revolution, people generally called for “New Era Literature.” In the 3rd Extended Conference of the Committee of China’s Literary Association, people repented for their past wrongs and looked forward to a new future. Ba Jin conveyed a positive belief in his closing speech for the meeting, which was titled “Yingjie shehui zhuyi wenyi de chuntian” 迎接社會主義文藝的春天 (To Welcome the Spring of Socialist Literature): “We have experienced a long time of labor pain. This is the labor pain for the birth of a new cultural climax. A new cultural climax is coming.”2 He prophesized the coming of a New Era Literature in his speech. Ba Jin further explained the ideas of “climax” and “spring”: “An important current topic is to forcefully represent new subject matters and new characters in the New Era.”3 Following his usual logic, Zhou Yang filled in the content of “new struggle” for this “New Era Literature”: “The experience and knowledge we accumulated in the Cultural Revolution greatly armed our mind, so we could better observe, study, and describe the complicated struggles in this New Era. It is an honorable and difficult mission for us as revolutionary literary workers to represent the life and struggles in this new socialist era.”4

From these descriptions we can see that although “New Era Literature” was borrowed from the political realm, literature had awakened from its subordination to politics. In 1978, people’s language and thinking habits were not yet completely detached from the abnormal age, but new ideas for cultural construction and literary development were growing.

The “labor pain” Ba Jin mentioned referred to the suffering during the Cultural Revolution, which provided an opportunity for the rebirth of literature. He obviously valued the significance of the unprecedented disaster for opening up a New Era. As the Cultural Revolution ended, he began immediately to write Suixiang lu to reflect on the Cultural Revolution and his own life. At the same time, he also proposed to build a museum for the Cultural Revolution, although the idea was not actualized. However, we can see that this senior writer considered criticizing

140


the old age as the premise for the establishment of the New Era Literature.The beginning of New Era Literature was signified by the passing of the old,

but the “new” of the literature of this period did not imply that it attached itself to “new” political ideology. It was not simply a replacement of old literary content by new experience and struggle in the same literary mode. The development of the New Era Literature exceeded the imagination of people during the transitional time.

I discussed earlier that the New Era of social development aimed at constructing and actualizing the modernization of industry, agriculture, national defense, and technological education. The New Era’s pursuits covered many aspects of society, including culture and thought. The promoted life style freed society from its closed situation and embraced the modern. All these changes were relevant to literature, and literature was a pioneer of this for it was a realm sensitive to social changes.

By the end of the 1970s, the literary circle linked discussions on the prosperity and transformation of literature with the four modernizations. Xu Chi wrote articles to explicate the relationship, including “Wenyi he xiandaihua” 文藝和現

代化 (Literature and Modernization) and “Xinshi yu sige xiandaihua” 新詩與四個

現代化 (New Poetry and the Four Modernizations). He endeavored to establish a connection between literature and the social goals of the New Era. On the one hand, his viewpoint was just a replacement of the subject of “service,” that is, literature changed from “serving the politics” to “serving the four modernizations,” he wrote: “Our literature have to serve the four modernizations! The four modernizations are in need of our service.”5 On the other hand, he also proposed that we had to “explore the path of modernization for socialist literature and create literature for socialist modernization.”6 If we disregard the ideological terminology, we can see that the issue of modernization was closely relevant to literature.

141


The Characteristics of New Era Literature and Its EndNew Era Literature experienced a transformative stage in which it was still bound to social consciousness. A characteristic of this stage was that literature and politics were still inseparable. From New Era Literature to the New Era of Literature there was a change in nature because they were essentially different. New Era Literature embodied the idea that literature was not yet separated from social ideology; it was subjugated to the social new era. Only when literature awoke from its state of political attachment in response to the calling from the spirit of the new era could it undergo its own transformation and construction autonomously and independently. By then literature entered a “New Era of Literature.” The term “New Era Literature” we use is an ambiguous expression. It contains two ideas but refers to one subject: the “New Era of Literature.”

The New Era of Literature was first of all a movement in which literature fought for independence. Writers were discontented with literature’s long-term attachment to politics and society. The New Era of Literature aimed at breaking literature and its development away from executive and authoritative interferences from sources of power not related to literature and bringing literature back to an order governed by aesthetic principles. From this perspective, New Era Literature changed the decades of trajectory of the development of literature because it initiated a new history for the development of literature which was not manipulated by the authority. In this period, although there were highly political literary movements that were not artistic enough such as “exposing and criticizing the Gang of Four” and Tiananman Poetry, since these were organized by the mass but not the authority, they could still be included in the New Era.

The most concrete change took place during the New Era of Literature was literature’s return to aesthetic and art. This was firstly reflected in literary theories and criticism and the introduction, adaptation, and practices of modernism in various areas such as music, painting, sculptures, and dance. Western modernism was introduced to China late in the 1970s and 1980s but it gained high attention. We should not directly evaluate the development of the trend because it was a deliberate “misreading” in a unique Chinese way. When people applied modernism, they did not consider the actual content and development of the trend but were only interested in its “modern” aspect. Since “modern” was opposite to “ancient” or “recent modern” and related to “modernization” in reality, it created a sense of uncertainty. Chinese writers were eager to get away from the shadow of tradition

142


and conventionality. They were passionate to learn from a declining trend imported from the West. Chinese intellectuals and writers felt profoundly that “tradition” and “the ancient” were suffocating, so they turned to “the modern” for some fresh air. They sought a sense of “modern” in their era—while it was actually absent, they created it themselves; as such, the new era was enriched by modernism.

A significant event for New Era Literature was the publication of Xie Mian’s “Zai xinde jueqi mianqian” 在新的崛起面前 (In Front of the New Rise) in Guangming ribao 光明日報 (Guangming Daily) in 1980. The poetry circle began a debate that concerned the “new rise” of Misty Poetry. Another significant event was the publication of Gao Xinjian’s Xiandai xiaoshuo jiqiao chutan in 1981 and follow-up discussions on modernism triggered by it. Different from previous literary events, the subjects of these two events transcended traditional utilitarian issues such as politics or subjects of thought but focused more on art itself. In this aspect, these events laid the foundation for the nature of New Era Literature.

In “Zhongguo wenxue xuyao xiandaipai” 中國文學需要現代派 (Chinese Literature Needs the Modernist School), addressing Li Tuo, Feng Jicai expressed his sense of excitement after reading Gao Xinjian’s work. Feng believed that the changes brought by modernism “in fact have started a revolution for literature.”7 He also argued for the necessity to introduce modernism to Chinese literature. He contended that literature is influenced by the social environment:8

In this great historical turn of entering socialist modern society, political sobriety will activate people’s thinking…Writers will feel the limitations of existing forms when they explore deeper into new subject matters…the changes in life, pace, and manner will change our aesthetic sense…The reform and opening up policy in economy will make people curious about the outside world.

This discussion already showed some new characteristics of this literary period.The debate on the Misty Poetry and the critical work of Gao Xinjian signified

literature’s new interest in modernist techniques, implying the beginning of a new stage in which literature broke away from its attachment to political operation and returned to an appreciation and exploration of its aesthetic aspect in all literary genres including poetry, fiction, and drama. This was the most revolutionary progress of the New Era Literature. Because of the establishment of art’s autonomous consciousness, this literary period was different from any of the literary movements that took place since the 1950s. It was literally epoch-making.

Besides social, political, and literary reasons, China’s New Era Literature favored modernism because it enabled a reconnection to the pursuit of literary

143


modernization of the May Fourth tradition that was suspended. The rise of New Literature which attempted to revolutionize old literature in the May Fourth period was Chinese writers’ effort to transform old literature, aiming at replacing ancient elements in literature by modern elements. This project was interrupted by various interferences for decades. Two sources of the most serious interferences were the strong grip of traditional classicism and the aggravation of ideological influence under serious survival crisis. As the social turmoil came to an end in the 1970s, a relatively stable social environment and relatively loose political ruling contributed to the awakening of the New Era Literature from the fetters of tradition.

The awakening of the artistic nature in literature defined the New Era Literature. All changes and exploration of the New Era Literature were related to literature itself and separated from issues that were not literature. Undoubtedly, there were also several other characteristics that constituted the new atmosphere of contemporary Chinese literature. First, Chinese literature became more open to the outside world. Before this New Era, literature was in a state of self-imprisonment. It was restricted by opinionated viewpoints and utilitarian values. It was over-sensitive to literary works that were not officially recognized and isolated itself from other influences. Second, Chinese literature became more willing to explore. As the fetters of ideology were loosened, writers became more passionately creative. Writers desired to seek more possibilities when previous political regulations were lifted. The whole atmosphere encouraged literature to experiment and explore outside the traditional norm. Openness and exploration were conditions for heterogeneity. To require literature to be homogenous straggled literary creativity, but this abnormal situation had last for decades. Closed literature depended on fixed styles and standards to produced literary works under the regulation of a unified model norm. Every aspect of literature was governed by the authority. The New Era changed this situation completely by turning away from homogeneity and embracing heterogeneity. Although the unified norm falling apart caused a loss of control in the literary development, literature gained a kind of new vitality thanks to this “loss of control.”

The New Era of Literature related to the ending of the Cultural Revolution and the opening up of the Chinese society developed independently until the end of the 1980s. All new things will become old things; New Era Literature was no exception as it reached a mature state. The development of literature is just like everything in this world—it also has to undergo a process of metabolism. New Era Literature could not stay new forever and it would be replaced by some even newer forms. However, in the realm of literature, valuable old things would be renewed in creative ways and continue to exist in new literary forms.

144


Fin de Siècle Sensibility and the Literature of the 1990sThe Chinese society in the 1990s could not be easily defined. It was an uncertain and formless society that accommodated all kinds of people regardless their class and ethnicity. Different cultures from the East and the West interacted and influenced each other. However, one thing was certain—it had already left behind the previous imprisonment and isolation. Nonetheless, the ideal and passion of the New Era were fading away. The sunlight that leaked in revealed the bright scenery and fast pace of the outside world. The Chinese society that walked out of darkness was full of imagination, but the imagination soon turned into vanity under the influence of reality. As the Chinese society transformed into a commercial society, it also became chaotic as the planned economy of the previous historical period and its social order disembodied.

For literature, many new phenomena had emerged since the late 1980s: the emergence of radical artistic practices such as the Post-Misty Poetry, avant-garde fiction, the fifth generation directors, the new generation art, and the new painting. The June Fourth Incident in 1989 sparked off another trend of literature’s transformation. In fact, this transformation was already developing in the mid-1980s. The replacement took place in a manner of gradual accumulation.

After the 1980s, the literary critical circle already began to notice the new phenomenon of literary transformation. Discussions at that time concerned “literature in the 1990s.” The 5th issue of Dangdai zuojia pinglun 當代作家評

論 (Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers) in 1991 published a series of articles under the topic: “Wenxue zouxiang jiuling niandai” 文學走向90年

代 (Towards Literature of the 1990s). Authors of these articles were professors and young scholars of the Peking University. These articles included Xie Mian’s “Tingzhi youxi yu zaidu piaoliu” 停止遊戲與再度漂流 (No More Playfulness and the Loss of Roots), Meng Fanhua’s “Pingmin wenxue de jieri” 平民文學的節日 (Festival for Popular Literature), Zhang Yiwu’s “Xiezuo zhimeng: hanyu wenxue de weilai” 寫作之夢：漢語文學的未來 (Literary Dream: the Future of Chinese Literature), Li Shulei’s “Zouxiang shijie zhidian” 走向世界之巔 (Towards the Top of the World), and Zhang Zhizhong’s “Piping de xianluo” 批評的陷落 (The Downfall of Criticism). This was the first comprehensive discussion in the circle of literary criticism on issues of the new literary world since the radical social changes of the 1980s. We can regard this discussion as the precursor that prepared for later

145


reflections on the post-new era literature.In his article, Xie Mian asserted: “The New Era Literature as a literary stage

has ended regardless its positive and negative significances.… The literary torrent that emerged a decade ago has now regressed. What follows should be a detached and reflective summarization.”9 Xie Mian expressed concerns for some existing literary phenomena, and he pointed out: “When life becomes less leisurely and the literary environment was not as good, isn’t it ruthless that our writers and critics still shamelessly treat their subjects as a plaything? Therefore, we should sincerely pronounce our request: Please stop your games!”10 In the Annual Beijing Conference of the Association of Contemporary Chinese Literary Studies (Zhongguo dangdai wenxue yanjiu hui beijing nianhui 中國當代文學研究會北京年會) convened in 1990, Xie Mian highly regarded the significance of the New Era Literature, but he also pointed out in his speech that this period had already ended. However, the mode and naming of the literature that came after were still not determined in the discussions at the conference. It is worth noticing that Zhang Yiwu was already using the idea of “post-new era” in his articles. He wrote:11

Entering the 1990s, Chinese literature as part of a culture of the third world that has the longest literary tradition and the most abundant texts preservation is undergoing profound transformation. The process of the cultural shift from the “new era” culture to the “post-new era” culture has revealed itself clearly. The heterogeneous, scattered, enigmatic, and ever-changing 1980s has passed. We are facing a brand new space for a different discourse.

This passage from Zhang Yiwu already included some foresights and ideas on the new literary period.

This discussion foretold some characteristics of the 1990s literature. The description contained foresights for some possible qualities of post-new era literature. Meng Fanhua believed: “The 1990s literature will be the festival for popular literature. Unadorned and secular literature that focuses on everyday life will be prevalent in the consumer market of literature.”12 He considered that this kind of consumerist literature would support literature’s function of entertainment, emphasize the tradition in terms of their value orientation, and concern more with storytelling in terms of its artistic representation. Overall, this kind of literature was characterized by its disposability. Many arguments and assertions at that time appealed to the commercial stage of China’s social development. The market economy obviously promoted the rapid transformation of social psychology and action. As a sensitive conceptual realm, the response of literature was ahead of all else.

146


After the June Fourth Incident in 1989, people began to reflect on the future of literature and contemplated on how to describe and summarize the literary stage after the New Era. Entering the 1990s, social psychology and literary practices were adjusted after three years of perplexity. No matter from the subjective perspective or the objective perspective, it is already possible to observe, study, and acknowledge the new literary period in all of its aspects from the social to the literary. On 12 September, 1992, the Institute of Chinese Language and Literature of the Peking University and Zuojia bao 作家報 (Writers Daily) jointly organized the “Post-New Era: Chinese Literature beyond the 1980s” Conference. Scholars, writers, editors, and journalists from Beijing, Tianjin, Shandong, and overseas participated in the conference. Song Suiliang believed: “The most significant outcome of this conference is to have come up with a name that is appropriate to history and feeling to refer to the new literary stage: the ‘Post-New Era Literature.’ I think history will endorse this name.” After the conference, Song even suggested to call this conference the naming meeting for the “Post-New Era Literature.”

The conference confirmed that the Post-New Era Literature at least included the following two aspects. First, New Era Literature and Post-New Era Literature were both literary stages that emerged after China opened up its communication to the world, the difference indicated by “post” implied that the Chinese literature of the 1980s had finished its course. Second, the New Era Literature underwent a process of transformation from its previous state to the next state; and the Post-New Era Literature signified an inclusion of the development and changes of the New Era Literature. It began in the 1990s, while the naming did not aim to represent a concrete sense of the literature of the 1990s, it projected a unique fin de siècle sensibility of China as it was a literary phenomenon emerged at the turn of the century. This special timing would endow Post-New Era Literature special significances.

Beginning with the discussions in this conference on Post-New Era Literature, the ending of the New Era Literature and the start of the Post-New Era Literature began to attract the attention of people across the literary circle. Although there were different opinions for the term “Post-New Era,” people generally agreed that the new stage of Chinese literature could no longer be contained by the “New Era Literature.” Feng Jicai’s article, “Yige shidai jieshu le” 一個時代結束了 (The End of an Era),published in the 3rd issue of Wenxue ziyou tan 文學自由談 (Free Literary Discussions) in 1993 was the most precise essay that announced the end of the New Era Literature:13

The concept of the New Era Literature is becoming thin in our mind without being noticed. The once magnificent literary revolution, including all its spectacles, power, energy, and essence, has finally faded away. We

147


cannot even find the “feeling” of it. Why do we need to say “Post-New Era” anyway? We should make it clear: that era has ended and become a static, fixed, and concluded historical period.There are four reasons why I consider that this period has come to an end.First, the New Era Literature emerged after the Cultural Revolution, in the “Order Restoration Movement” and the 3rd Thought Emancipation Movement. It aimed at acting as an antagonistic literature against the abnormal literature of the Cultural Revolution, so it had its own content and missions. It was required to break into all restricted areas for literature; the key issue was to break away from the restraint that “literature should serve political purposes.” Throughout the decade, literature travelled a rough path from being criticized by politics to making social evaluations. Literature has its own mission in every historical era. From this perspective, the “New Era Literature” has completed its splendid mission in its historical stage.Second, another mission of the “New Era Literature” was to turn literature’s focus back to itself. Since for a long time literature was interfered by non-literary influences, literature became alienated from itself, so writers and critics considered this mission more sacred than others. Throughout the decade, discussions on forms, the emphasis on texts, and explorations of different literary possibilities brought literature back to its own course. Its development was excellent and the mission was well-achieved.Third, the New Literature attracted thousands of readers with its strong impact on people’s thought and its artistic charisma (including the personalities and talents of many writers). Readers participated in the writers’ reflection in Scar Literature and Reflection Literature; through Xungen Literature and Experimental Literature, readers shared the aesthetic experiences of the writers. The “New Era Literature” accumulated a huge readership. The participation of faithful readers is indispensable for any literary movement. Readers of every era have their own reading interest and aesthetic taste. Now, the readership of the “New Era Literature” has become diverse. When the stars fade away the moon set in the west. The “New Era Literature” receded because it lost the support from its readers.Fourth, in the past year, the market economy casted a strong impact on the Chinese society. The nature of social issues, social psychology, and value concepts have greatly changed. All these aspects have changed literature and its readers. The missions, functions, and methods of literature need to be reevaluated and re-determined. The pressure that writers face is also different. If we say the “New Era Literature” strived to get back its

148


autonomy, literature now should strive to preserve itself. Everything has to change, so as the context for literature.Although a historical period has ended, writers are still here. They have to change to another vehicle. However, the next era might not be still an era for literature. In our history, there were rarely times that belonged to literature. Literature stayed lonely for most of the time. Writers probably have to write literature in an age of economy. A sturdy man looking for the river with a sampan on his shoulder—this is the overall feeling I have for literature’s future.We must return to the topic of this article: the “New Era Literature” has come to an end.

Feng Jicai’s article regarded the end of the New Era Literature as the end of a historical stage. The new stage might not be a stage of literature. His viewpoint was that not all eras belonged to literature, and sometimes an era might belong to economy, just as sometimes an era might belong to politics. My opinion is rather different—I consider literature’s era the same as the literature of that era. Despite changes in different eras, each era has its own literature, because literature will continue to evolve and literature’s era will renew itself.

Conclusion

A Memorial for Literature (1949–1999)

150


A Memorial for Literature (1949–1999)A Special Literary Stage

80 years has passed up till now (1999) since the beginning of the development of China’s New Literature. To divide this period of history, the first 30 years constituted one stage while the 50 years after constituted another. The former was commonly known as “modern Chinese literature” and the latter “contemporary Chinese literature.” The two stages can be further divided into more refined stages, but this distinction has been generally agreed and recognized. As a component of China’s New Literature, the naming of “contemporary literature” that began in 1949 has attracted more questioning recently. Further discussions will eventually solve the problem with the passing of time. In this essay, I will continue to apply the concept of “contemporary literature” and consider 1949 as the starting year of this stage of Chinese literature.

The political situation of China changed tremendously in 1949. Since contemporary Chinese literature and contemporary Chinese politics were closely related—for most of the time politics motivated literature and literature acted in concert with politics, the political change had determining effect on literature. Because of the regime change, the unified Chinese literature of the past split into two streams chiefly: Mainland Chinese literature and Taiwanese literature. The literature of Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau developed separately for decades, starting a historical period in which different streams of Chinese literature complemented and reflected each other. This was a unique part in the history of New Literature.

For New Literature, this stage was special because of the great changes it brought. On the one hand, it continued the New Literature tradition of the May Fourth Movement; on the other hand, some characteristics of this literary tradition underwent significant transformation which changed the direction of the original literary development. This transformation created some new literary characteristics. It no doubt rewrote and enriched the history of New Literature. One of the most important aspects of the literary experience of this stage was the new development of literary content, covering new aspects such as new everyday life and new characters. The replacement of the old by the new in literature provided many new topics for readers.

151


Social Utilitarianism

Contemporary Chinese literature directly inherited the literary tradition of strengthening the nation and enlightening the people from modern Chinese literature. Several generations of social elites sought ways to save the nation in the context of serious international and domestic problems. Facing repeated military defeats, attempts to save the nation through industry or the Self-Strengthening Movement proved to be ineffective. Literature became an important means for Chinese intellectuals to realize their ideals. These progressive intellectuals believed that in order to strengthen the nation, the people had to be enlightened. Poetry, fiction, drama, and different kinds of prose were possible means to cultivate the people and wake them from their cultural backwardness. These Chinese intellectuals regarded highly the use and value of literature.

From reforming literature to literary revolution, Chinese writers strived to communicate their ideas to the masses through literature by innovating the content and form of literature. This was an extension of the line of thought which believed that literature should be useful for changing the mentality of the masses. Therefore, we can notice that from “literature for life’s sake” proposed at the start of the New Literature Revolution to literature “for saving the nation,” “for national defense,” and “for politics,” each literary stage promoted and practiced a certain literary function that aimed at connecting literature to social development and the construction of people’s mentality.

All of the above reflect Chinese literature’s utilitarianism. Although literature has many functions, the idea that “literature should be of some use for the world” was an enduring thought. This is related to China’s social condition as well as China’s cultural tradition. The idea was pushed to an extreme in contemporary Chinese literature when “usefulness” of literature was dominated by political motives. The idea that literature should serve peasants, workers, and soldiers emerged early in the Civil War period, after the end of the Second Anti-Japanese War. Agriculture was China’s national foundation. The main military force of the Communist Party was from peasants. The Party’s bases were also in villages, thus it was a necessary move to place the focus of literary development in rural areas.

The Communist Party extended its influence from rural areas to cities. As the Communist Party gradually rose to power, it reconstructed all aspects of the life of Chinese people, including the promotion of the idea that literature should serve peasants, workers, and soldiers. During The First National Conference of the Representatives of Literary and Art Workers (Zhonghua quanguo wenxue yishu gongzuozhe daibiao dahui 中華全國文學藝術工作者代表大會) that took place in July 1949, Zhou Yang presented his report “Xin de renmin de wenyi,” in which he

152


claimed: “In Chairman Mao’s ‘Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art,’ he laid down the direction for the development of the literature of New China. Literary and art workers of those liberated areas firmly put it into practice with self-motivation. They proved that this direction is correct through their own experience. We believe that there is no other possible direction. If there is, it would be a wrong one.”1 Zhou Yang’s tone here was stern and unquestionable; the development of the Chinese literature after 1949 was conducted according to the route and direction that he presented. This was the outcome of the strengthening of social utilitarianism of Chinese literature in the contemporary period.

The Support from the Peasant Culture

The power of social utilitarianism was very strong. Not only because the newly established authority firmly endorsed it, but also because it was favored by the custom and taste of the peasants who constituted the largest proportion in the Chinese population. It was supported by the rural civilization and peasant culture. The literary and art policies that were only implemented in some regions were then promoted throughout the country. This grand project was related to the ruler’s ambition to establish a unified planned society.

The conflict between the rural civilization and modern metropolitan civilization continued to afflict the progress of Chinese literature. China is a large agricultural country. Peasants and landlords formed the rural culture and this became a dominant cultural form. The power of metropolitan intellectuals in China was weak and unstable. Some of these intellectuals came from villages, although some might be from small towns, their roots were in villages. They moved to large cities such as Shanghai and Beijing from villages and then travelled far to the West. They introduced the fire of enlightenment from the Western modern civilization to China. They used the candlelight from the West to illuminate the darkness of feudal China. These intellectuals who received Western education caused a great impact on the Chinese society during special times (such as the May Fourth period), but during other times, they were still controlled by rural Chinese culture. They were somehow isolated.

This was particularly conspicuous in wartime Yan’an. Mao’s “Talks” was published because of the serious conflict between the two cultures. When the masses (including military troops and cadres) could only appreciate rural culture, to perform Leiyu 雷雨 (Thunderstorm) or other works by Cao Yu would be inappropriate. Many literary tragedies happened because of the conflict. In the 1950s, controversies and criticism on Xiao Yemu’s “Women fufu zhijian” were also represented the cultural conflict between the rural and the city. The conflict was

153


also touched upon in Wei Junyi’s “Lusha de lu” 露莎的路 (The Road of Lusha). Elite intellectuals brought along their tastes and customs to the backward caves in Yan’an, but these were ridiculously unfitting for the rural context.

Discussions on literature seemed complicated, but the fundamental cause was still the conflict between rural civilization and metropolitan civilization. In China, it represented the conflict between the modern and the traditional. From this perspective, discussions on the forms of New Poetry and the controversies that Misty Poetry ignited in the 1980s were reflections of the conflict between the modern and the traditional, as well as the conflict of metropolitan civilization and rural civilization.

Invigorated by military victory, peasants and their representative culture were greatly empowered. This empowerment weakened the fragile consciousness of metropolitan intellectuals. It changed the direction of the literary movement dominated by the metropolitan civilization formed during the May Fourth Movement. Undoubtedly, rural civilization as the winner powerfully manipulated the outlook of Chinese culture. Since the mid-20th century, Communist thought reform movements purported to rectify the mentality of all intellectuals inaugurated a long-term dominance of rural civilization over metropolitan civilization in China.

On the level of economy, socialist unification was greatly promoted, let alone the unification on the level of politics. For the unification on the ideological level, the situation in literature was the most complicated and troublesome. The production of literature was highly individualized, as it depended on the personal experience, personalities, cultivation, and aesthetic tastes of individual writers. Each writer was an independent world. Moreover, to be successful in literature, writers had to exercise their unique thinking, unrestrained imagination, and distinctive artistic expression. The literary circle was plunged into a difficult situation, that is, the contradiction between “the individual” and “the collective.” The project of literary unification encountered a lot of resistance.

Although the task of reforming different writers by forcing them to fit into a particular framework was seemingly impossible, it was implemented by state power throughout the country. The principle for the reform was stated in Mao’s “Talks”—literature should serve peasants, workers, and soldiers. This was a long-term project that transformed the spiritual realm, including thoughts, feelings, and creative writing, of intellectuals and writers by using the standard of the rural and peasants.

The progression of the project was on the one hand driven by the self-conscious or forced thought reform of the intellectuals; on the other hand, it was also complemented with the promotion of endless political and literary critical movements. For writers’ thought reform, the general tendency was to require

154


writers to perform self-criticism and self-denial on their past writings. They also had to promise to write literature that complied with new political directions and standards set by the authority. Many writers reviewed and criticized their “individualism” because this was incompatible with the “collectivism” of workers, peasants, and soldiers. The denial of individualism was undoubtedly a dehumanizing act for writers. Writers conducted their personal creative activities as a person. Deleting individualism in literature was just the same as deleting an individual’s freedom of thought and creativity. This was the misfortune of literature.

The outcome of Chinese writers’ self-denial was a wide-spread aphasia among writers. Few writers could escape suffering from the problem and had a successful career, except those who originally came from villages or had lived in villages for a long time. Even though some writers wrote in the “new language,” their writings seemed unnatural and unskilled, as described by Mao in his speech: “Not only that their language is tasteless, their writings always contain some made-up phrases and sentences that are the opposite of the language of the people… If I have to describe this, I would say that the clothes are of the people, but their faces are still petit bourgeois intellectuals.”2

Precisely under this context, many Chinese writers forsook their life experience in order to implement the official direction. They hid or deleted their artistic personality to describe and express (more commonly described as “reflect”) lives and people that were unfamiliar to them. Many gifted writers lost their talent and wisdom despite that they were in the mature period of their writing career because they gave up their strengths and exposed their weakness as they suppressed their individuality to adapt to collectivity. They hid their personal insights and viewpoints in order to write for the masses. We do not see a unique Ding Ling in “Taiyang zhaozai Sangganhe shang” 太陽照在桑乾河上 (Sunshine on the Sanggan River), which was present in “Shafei nushi de riji” 莎菲女士的日記 (Miss Sophia’s Diary), even though the latter was wrote in a much earlier time than the former. “Shafei” was the work that confirmed the presence of Ding Ling’s uniqueness in her works and her significance in the literary history but not the later works that earned her fame and honor.

The same happened to Cao Yu’s writing career. Cao Yu wrote many great works in early years, and he reached the top of modern Chinese literature at the prime of his life. His later works such as Minglang de tian 明朗的天 (A Bright Day), Danjian pian 膽劍篇 (Bravery and the Sword), and Wang Zhaojun 王昭君 were unsuccessful works that he produced after his followed the state instructions and gave up his uniqueness. His brilliance could only be achieved in the first half of his life. Cao Yu realized this in his old age but that was too late. Perhaps Lao She’s Chaguan 茶

155


館 (The Tea House) was an exceptional case. However, if we examine Lao She’s works more closely, we can see that it was his past life and personal talent that had shone through the “old teahouse” that he depicted instead of the imposed “experience” he acquired. Several other masters of modern literature were still in their prime time during the 1950s, such as Guo Moruo, Mao Dun, Ba Jin, and Shen Congwen, but some of them chose to stay silent (such as Shen Congwen), some chose to work on something else (such as Mao Dun). It was regretful that writers who chose to continue writing did not produce works that are comparable to their previous masterpieces such as “Nüshen” , Jia , and Qi Yuan 憩園.

The Victory of the New Literary Mode

Although the unification of literature brought many problems, the reality was not entirely bleak. There were writers who became successful in the new situation. Zhao Shuli was the pride of this literary era. His stories about China’s villages and peasants made the best achievement for the genre of rural literature since the establishment of modern literature. Zhao created a series of lively and realistic images of peasants. He became the master for literary presentations of China’s villages. He was a great synthesizer. In the aspect of practicing the new direction of New Literature, Zhao made achievements that were impossible for others. It was possibly because Zhao was himself a peasant; he understood the lives of the hardworking Chinese peasants deeply. Therefore, the issue in concern was not that writers should not write about workers, peasants, and soldiers, but they should do so if they were themselves familiar with the subjects. The same subject materials could be successfully used by writers such as Zhao Shuli but did not work so well in the writings of others.

The promotion of rural culture was successful in some writers. A new stream of writing—the rural literature—emerged in China’s New Literature. Writers contributed to the representation of China’s rural life. Through his presentation of his childhood experience in the rural area, Lu Xun expressed a sense of love-hate nostalgia for the villages and the stern customs of ancient China. With the promotion of “literature for life’s sake,” more modern writers depicted the melancholy of China’s villages. However, because of the limitation of their position as intellectuals, the breadth and depth of their representation of Chinese villages were far from comparable to that of the writers who responded to the call for a “workers, peasants, and soldiers direction,” represented by Zhao Shuli.

For these writers, to represent the new era and new characters was not a vain statement but should be put into real actions. Writers who are worth mentioning include Sun Li, Liu Qing, and the group of Shanyaodan 山藥蛋 writers. They created

156


a typical image of a group of Chinese peasants who overcame sufferings and struggled for new life. The rebellious personality of Zhu Laozhong in Hongqi pu 紅旗譜 (The Red Flag Chronicle) distantly inherited the characters of the heroes in Shuihu zhuan 水滸傳 (Water Margin). Characters in “Xiao Erhei jiehun” 小二黑結婚 (The Wedding of Xiao Erhei) reminded us of the characters in Lu Xun’ s “Guxiang” 故鄉 (The Hometown). These writers connected with their characters by heart; they were not mere “spokesmen.” We will not find an onlooker’s sympathetic perspective of an intellectual in these stories. These writers were true comrades of the peasants sharing the land. Their authentic experience of the suffering and joy of China’s yellow earth was embodied in the stories. Sun Li’s “Shandi huiyi” 山地回憶 (Memories of the Mountains) and “Hehua dian” 荷花淀 (The Lotus Lake) emanated the scent of the Northern earth in an era of poverty and suffering.

Contemporary Chinese literature strived to promote the “workers, peasants, and soldiers direction.” A great deal was achieved in the aspect of representing the life of peasants, who constituted the largest part of the Chinese population. Reviewing Chinese literature since the May Fourth Movement, we see that the initiators and supporters of the literary revolution were urban intellectuals. Most of them received good Western education abroad. Although many of them were from villages, but villages were not within people’s interest. They aimed at introducing Western concepts and experience to revolutionize China’s old literature. Therefore, for those people, although perhaps they also sympathized with the destiny of peasants, their knowledge of peasants was limited. Their representation of the rural culture was also not profound enough. Something more urgent had attracted their attention.

From the 1940s to the 1950s, the aforementioned situation changed greatly. Promoted by the Communist Party and implemented by writers, rural literature reached its peak in the history of New Literature. Zhao Shuli was a master of rural literature whose art was comparable to that of other modern literary masters. Zhao Shuli established a classical literary style for representing rural China. His works were infused with the intelligence and humor of peasantry, perceptive observations of Chinese villages, and realistic representations of characters. All these made Zhao a unique and irreplaceable writer in the history of New Literature. Besides Zhao Shuli, there was a group of Chinese writers who contributed a batch of significant works to New Literature under this particular direction. Novels such as Hongqi pu, “Hehua dian,” and Chuangye shi, poems such as “Zhanghe shui” 漳河水, and the ballads of folk singers such as Wang Laojiu brought a new atmosphere to Chinese literature.

Therefore, the issue at stake was not that whether writing about the rural was proper or not, but whether it was proper to ask everyone to write about the rural.

157


During wartime, it was understandable that writers were encouraged to write literature that attracted peasants’ support for the war considering the urgent cause of social crisis. However, after the Communist Party came into power, continuing with this strategy indeed reflected the narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness of the authority, as society had become more complicated. More seriously, the extreme and violent means employed to implement this strategy would bring tragic outcomes to society unavoidably.

In the 1950s, the first criticism conducted in accordance with the policy was directed against Xiao Yemu’s “Women fufu zhijian,” a story that represented the move from the village to the city and expressed the complications of the internal contradictions and struggles of characters. We should notice that people’s criticism on this work was on the story’s treatment of the difference between the rural-born wife who was herself a worker-cadre and her husband who was an intellectual on their opinions toward the city. The wife stayed firm in supporting the “correct standpoint” that they needed to “reform” the city with rural customs. However, the husband held a different point of view. Although the story obviously trod on a forbidden area of peasant issues, the fierceness of the criticism it attracted was still surprising.

On 18 June, 1951, Renmin ribao 人民日報 (People’s Daily) published Chen Yong’s article, “Xiao Yemu chuangzuo de yixie qingxiang” 蕭也牧創作的一些傾向 (Some tendencies in the Works of Xiao Yemu), which expressed concerned about some features of Xiao’s story. However, it was considered not fierce enough, on 25 June of the same year, the chief editor of Wenyi bao 文藝報 (Literature Daily), Feng Xuefeng, published a reader’s letter in the name of “Li Dingzhong,” titled “Fandui wannong renmin de taidu, fandui xinde diji quwei” 反對玩弄人民的態

度，反對新的低級趣味 (Objection to Fooling the People, Objection to New Bad Taste). The article censured the writer for his attitude towards the “female worker cadre Comrade Zhang” (that is, the wife in the story), that his depiction only served to “satisfy his playful and elitist aesthetic taste.”3 Feng further warned that: “We should erect a placard by the side of the cliff and draw a skull on it to warn those who are not serious about their art, especially those who have no love and compassion for the laboring people.”4 The article even went on to characterize Xiao Yemu as a “petite bourgeoisie, and he was the worst petite bourgeoisie of all.”5 Xiao Yemu suffered from prosecution because of his writing. He died an untimely death miserably. Unfortunately, it was more pathetic that such tragic destiny did not only happen to Xiao Yemu.

158


The Experience of Planned Literature

As the Cultural Revolution proceeded, Chinese Literature encountered a grim situation. Writers and artists with complicated backgrounds had to forsake their past and participated in extremely harsh thought reform. Chinese literature underwent unprecedented changes under the imperatives of a grand project of unification. The changes covered a comprehensive range of aspects. Writers were required to work towards the same goal in the same way. For example, writers had to engage in “fierce struggles” to get familiar with people and issues that were originally unfamiliar to them. They were required to observe, experience, study, and analyze these aspects, and to establish living bases in various rural areas. For literary creations, regulations were set for both content and form. For example, writers had to write about heroes instead of mediocre people. The tone of their writings must be bright but not gloom. Artistic form used must cater to the popular taste and represent nationalist themes.

The political and literary critical movements that took place during the Cultural Revolution, despite their different names in different stages, mostly focused on writers whose writings were deviated from the unification strategies or considered incorrect, or even reactionary. The movements aimed at rectifying these tendencies through struggles. Many writers quitted their writing career or suffered from “aphasia” because of these prosecutions. Literature became homogenous and was drained of its vital energy. After the establishment of New China, literature became extremely homogeneous in various periods of political turmoil such as the Great Leap and the Cultural Revolution, especially the latter. The prevalence of “model literature” brought an unparalleled state of desolation for literature.

The literature we have nowadays recovered from the extreme despair of the Cultural Revolution. The open society invigorated literature. We had learnt a lesson from the failure of implementing a planned and single economy which brought great disaster to our society. Moreover, although planned and single literature did not affect the nation’s prosperity and people’s livelihood as directly as the economy did, the destruction brought by this kind of literary policy to society was long-lasting. Several generations of Chinese suffered from a kind of spiritual crisis that could be aptly attributed to literature’s barrenness. People’s mentality became fragile and their sensibility turned numb in harsh political oppression.

Literary freedom can certainly stimulate the liveliness of a society. Planned literature did not only strangle talents and create personal or familial tragedies, but also caused the mental crisis of several generations of Chinese intellectuals. While the pioneers of the May Fourth Movement strived to seek remedial means to remold the Chinese national spirit in order to save the nation, during the periods of

159


political turmoil under the Communist rule people colluded in creating a desolate state of literature. This was nothing but self-destruction. If we return to the years of the Cultural Revolution and review the spiritual wasteland we created, and if we still remember what Scar Literature revealed to us, we should understand that the above evaluation was not exaggerated.

The Entanglement of Politics and Literature

After the birth of New Literature, literary pioneers voraciously imported many foreign theories and borrowed foreign ideas to form their principles of writing. Xin qingnian was eager to introduce new theories to broaden the horizon of Chinese writers. Motived by the ideal of strengthening the nation and enlightening the people through literature, Chinese writers focused on depicting the difficulties of the livelihood of the lower class. The serious opposition between the rich and the poor and the struggle of the grass-roots were represented in poetry and fiction.

Chinese writers emphasized realist literary principles. The establishment of the Association for Literary Studies and the promotion and practice of the society’s principle, “literature for life’s sake,” reflected the influence of realism on Chinese literature during the May Fourth period. Literature examined and presented in detail the real living condition of Chinese people and their suffering and hope. Lu Xun’s early short stories were lively representations of the common lives of Chinese people. From the very beginning, Lu Xun focused on criticizing the mentality of Chinese people. The beginning had also become the peak that was hard to surmount by later generations.

Realist literature was undoubtedly a piece of rare treasure for writers in modern China, because it could represent the real life in a lively and concrete manner. Early New Literature writers recognized its value in the direct relationship between literature and society that it embodied. These writers were keen to remold the mentality of people and effect social changes through literature. They believed literature had to be of some practical use for society. The rise of realism precisely catered to this aspiration of the writers.

Later, socialist and dialectical materialist literary ideas of the Soviet Union were introduced to China. These theories concerned the social aspect of literature and its function in society, as well as the sense of social mission of writers. These theories promoted the idea that literature had to be founded on the basis of laboring, because laboring supplied for the livelihood of people, and literature was also a product of human labor. This theory easily assimilated with the radical social ideal of Chinese intellectuals. Progressive members among Chinese intellectuals ceaselessly looked for remedial means to save the nation because they witnessed the national crisis

160


and the sufferings of the people. Very few of them were not affectively influenced by the new thoughts.

The 1930s was the period of prosperous development of China’s leftist literature. Since leftist literature and the spread of communist thoughts were closely related, a trend of thought that emphasized literature’s social aspect became prevalent. New social thought and revolutionary literature were very compatible to each other and became a very strong influence. From this perspective, Chinese literature transformed rapidly from “literature for life” to “literature for politics.”

Contemporary literature directly inherited the tradition of the literature of the liberated areas. Literary thoughts incompatible with this tradition were all revised and incorporated into it. Entering the 1950s, literature became even more state-regulated. The social aspect of literature dominated all other aspects of literature. The relationship between literature and society, especially the relationship between literature and politics, was more systematically and comprehensively elaborated. Literature was subjected to politics. Literature should proactively take the initiative to reflect social reality. Politicized literary policies required writers to consciously fulfil his responsibility for society. Therefore, as society’s requirement on literature was raised, literature became not only representations of social life; it was even the “barometer” and “wind vane” of class struggle. Many literary and art leaders of the 1950s onwards employed these terminology repeatedly.

The relationship between literature and society was never as close as such before. During the three decades from the 1950s to 1970s, literature was firmly tied to the huge socio-political machine. The Chinese society during this period was capricious. Many “live performances” were put on this stage. The happiness and sadness of the life drama was widely represented and recorded in literature. As society required literature to become a tool for class struggle, on the one hand, literature lost itself in following the fickle pace of class struggle; on the other hand, the scenes and atmosphere of the ebb and flow of those social movements were preserved in literature thanks to literature’s direct political participation. Because politics required an instant response from literature, an unexpected outcome was that a large amount of social information was recorded by literature.

Since the 1950s, the political drama of the Chinese society became worse in countless political movements and the Great Leap. The political craze reached its climax during the Cultural Revolution. When we review this history, we see that Chinese literature of this period provided valuable and practical social and literary experience for critical examination. Here, “experience” is a neutral term; it refers to both the experience of gain and loss. Contemporary literature provided literary history with large amount of useful “texts.” These texts were records of social progress and witness of literary changes. For example, the eight “model operas”

161


were literary relics from a time of political turmoil and are now remembered as “red classics.” It was a peculiar phenomenon that the spiritual need of the whole China was fed on only eight model operas for a whole decade.

When looking back to our past, it is hard not to wonder, how did we get through all those difficult days? The truth was that, behind the absurd social phenomenon was a long period of theoretical development conducted by the authority’s systematic discourse. People gradually accustomed to the situation. The eight model operas vividly and comprehensively presented the social-political-literary mental picture of that period with its scripts, stage design, characterization, and plots. Such “richness” forcefully indicated the “barrenness” of the time.

The history of Chinese literature from the 1950s onwards was basically propelled by various political-literary movements. The formation of this mode of literary development was the outcome of a long-term social engineering instead of an abrupt change of direction. The social function of literature has been emphasized in the long history of Chinese literature. The extreme situation could be attributed to causes within and outside literature. This part of the history of Chinese literature left with us important lessons. It indeed seriously damaged the nature and law of literature. Many literary aspects were denied of their significance, for example the uniqueness of literature as self-expression; even the aesthetic and poetic aspects of literature and literature’s universal humanistic concerns were all cast away. Only the social aspect of literature was left. Moreover, literature of this period covered only a narrow range of social issues as it was limited to reflecting current political interest.

However, when we look at the matter more closely, it was not hard to see that although politics required literature to be subordinated to it, literature also acted as an accomplice of politics. We should be aware of our own fault in the sacrifices that literature made for politics when they worked together intimately. Once literature is released from external constraints, it also loses its self-discipline in different secular pursuits. Literature turns into something dispensable for society. The writings of some writers become some kind of self-centered soliloquy. Regardless what happened in society, these writers paid no attention to that. If literature lost itself because it attempted too hard to serve society in the past, it will risk losing its audience for isolating itself from society now.

The fact that literature becomes dispensable for its readers also affects the development of literature adversely. Literature largely caters to secular taste has become more popularized and commodified. Literature that loses its significance and value detaches from aspects of life except those it is interested in. When literature no longer concerns society and the destiny and situation of people, its situation also changes. People would ask, if literature no long cares about the life

162


and fate of people, why should people care about literature? And this question is not a pointless one.

Literature’s Construction of the “Kingdom of Happiness”

Since the 1950s, a joyful, vibrant atmosphere pervaded the Chinese society. This was an era full of hope and optimism. Such an era surely had its effect on literature. Many works written during this period recorded the optimistic attitude and happiness of the era. This was an era that the old was replaced by the new. People happily participated in laboring and work. They bade farewell to the past and created a new beginning every day. The literature of this era generally showed a vernal tone that indicated the passing of winter and the coming of spring. Such a mentality was revealed by the tone and content of the literary works produced in this period. The totality of the literature of the era represented the general style of the era.

Due to the promotion of literary unification, writers consciously reduced the representation of their personal style in their works, including the pursuit of individuality, unique narrative style, personalized tone, and even particular ways of phrasing and wording. All these were considered inappropriate and individualistic artistic practices. Under such a situation, many writers voluntarily, while some others involuntarily, gave up their personal styles and turned to a style of collectivism that represented social totality and standard.

Remarkable social changes compelled writers to recognize that a new era was coming. We had left darkness behind and what was waiting for us ahead was the bright light of the rising sun. At the same time, the unification of society, politics, and literature was gradually actualized through various executive measures (including endless political movements). All these objective and subjective conditions effectively constituted literature’s consistent style in this era. Obviously, as personal and different schools of literary styles attenuated or even disappeared, a homogenous style of the era was forming.

This was an era of hope; hence literature should also be optimistic and joyful. Pessimism and melancholy were blue in color and thus inappropriate. Many political and literary critics censured depressing tone in literature. They condemned these works for lacking “bright colors” and forced writers to comply with an officially designed homogenous style.

The life of literature always depends on individuality. It is a writer’s personal innovativeness that endorses a literary work its significance and worth of existence.

163


This innovativeness should be embodied in the profundity of the content and the depth of the representation of life, as well as the strong artistic expression and personality of a writer. Successful writers always strive to make their works different from any other writers. Therefore, an ideal world of literary prosperity should provide space for every writer to create his own world independently. Although this was difficult to achieve, it has been the ideal that all writers strive to pursue.

However, for a long time, it was not the case for contemporary Chinese literature. In our pursuit of an intimate relationship between literature and politics and our requirement for literature to represent social life instantly, literature had to demonstrate a public and unified style. This is the joyful style that I refer to as the “vernal tone.” Writers created an unreliable and unreal “kingdom of happiness” in literature which should be a world of different colors and emotions in reality. It was unreal because it only represented the surface of social life; it was even an appearance artificially created. In fact, under the disguise of optimism, the complexity of life still existed; “happiness” did not make life any simpler. There was happiness in life, but there was also sorrow. In people’s everyday life, there are always joy, anger, sadness, and delight, as well as suffering and grief. All of these did not disappear with the inception of the new era; they were only “purified” by people’s will of power. Therefore, what remained in our literature was a single tone, a single emotion, a single style.

From the perspective of the social reality, although the war of the early 1950s, the Korean War, ended and the country began its comprehensive social construction, which brought a peaceful atmosphere, as life unfolded itself, contradictions and conflicts crept in the shadow behind the seemingly bright situation. There was a trendy rhetoric question in the circle of literary criticism to criticize works that represented views of life different from the mainstream: “Is this the reality of life?” But ironically, these different views were indeed much truer representations. Life itself was even more grim and hateful than these dark representations. In the mid-1950s, many conscientious writers already foresaw the sufferings and tragedies that would happen afterwards. Someone proposed “not to close your eyes in front of the people’s suffering,” and suggested that the function of literature was to “intervene in life”—these claims revealed a kind of awakening and sense of mission. However, these warnings did not avail, because what politics asked for from literature was unconditional praises and confirmation of the political achievements of the party through literature’s ornate descriptions of the life under the regime written in the official tone.

In fact, this kind of literature did not represent the social reality or the wide variety of people’s living conditions. Even if we evaluate it from the most common

164


realist perspective, it is still unnatural to require literature to adapt a monotonous joyful tone and atmosphere to embody the spirit of the time. In the history of Chinese literature, it has been widely believed that literature on unhappiness is generally better than literature on happiness in terms of their aesthetic value. Written in the third year of Yuanhe of the Tang dynasty (AD888), Han Yu’s preface to Jingtan changhe ji 荊潭唱和集 (Jingtan Collection of Poetry and Songs) elucidated this point: “Peaceful sound is usually light while sorrowful sound is usually great. It is difficult for joyful words to be crafty but it is easier for words of poverty and suffering to be good.” Our literary pursuit in the 1950s totally deviated from this view. Writers were determined to create a literary “kingdom of happiness” and drive away any sorrowful emotions.

Two Turns of the Century and Three Changes in Literature

The above was an overall sketch of several major phenomena since the 1950s. These positive and negative experiences had become our treasure. These experiences were the memorial left with us by the development of Chinese literature in the second half of the century. As the political turmoil of the late 1970s ended, literature also began to adjust itself. From then on, every literary movement was an attempt to deliver literature back to its normal track. The end of the Cultural Revolution was a great pronouncement. It announced the disintegration of a fixed, rigid, and unified literary order. Literature was liberated from strict regulations and began to development under a relatively free condition. This was another significant change of the New Literature.

Revolutionary movements of Chinese literature can be traced back to the late 19th century. A group of pioneers attempted to save China from its wretched destiny through revolutionizing old literature. Social urgency compelled them to tie literature up with politics. In their understanding, renewal of literature and literary revolution were necessary for strengthening the nation and enlightening the people. When we review the history of the consequent literary movements from the turn of the 20th century to the turn of the 21st century, we recognize three important changes in the trend of literary development. The first change took place in the literary revolution of the May Fourth Movement in 1919, in which old literature was replaced by New Literature. The second change occurred in the 1940s, in which literature for workers, peasants, and soldiers was widely promoted. A characteristic of the second change of the literary trend was that a unified literary order replaced the literary variety formed in the May Fourth period. After

165


the Cultural Revolution, the emergence of the New Era Literature signified the third change in the literary trend, which then brought about the “post-New Era Literature” under the implement of market economy.

It is necessary to discuss a bit further on the literary trend of “post-New Era Literature.” Literature of this period basically undermined the strong ideological control on literature since the rise of leftist literature. Although the ideological power that restrained the development of literature continued to exist, the development of literature already became more varied and it was also affected by principles of the market economy. Thanks to the spread of secular aesthetic taste, advertisements and media-hype, and the temptation of the market, writers and publishers actively participated in the new order to gain personal interests. Writers guided by ideologies and lost their freedom previously had to face another kind of pressure under the dominance of the economy and market forces, with perhaps, a few exceptions that stood firm in their attitude.

The change in the literary trend transformed Chinese literature tremendously. Although it changed the monotonous tendency of Chinese literature, its significance was not to revive the tradition of the May Fourth Movement or deconstruct the reification of literature in the process of literary unification of the previous decades. The era was a brand new literary era. Being released from the huge and unified political machine, literature is individualized—today, each writer or each work is a unique individual.

The unified machine disintegrated. Literary creation was no longer collective acts. Literary writings no longer represented a group or other people. To push it to the extreme, we can say that the relationship between literature and society became unprecedentedly remote. The personalization of literary writing and expression became the most important literary outlook of the contemporary. Personal writing, privacy, extreme personal experience, and the most hidden psychological activities and emotions of writers became important writing materials for literature and even the basic content of literature.

This was a peculiar literary era. The fundamental value of literature was questioned, the meaning of literature was dismissed, and the aesthetic function of literature was neglected. There was no more mainstream literature and people no longer worshipped or believed in the so-called authorities. They only followed their own calls. Gimmicks such as “bestselling books,” “bestselling lists,” “launching ceremonies,” “seminars,” and “signed copies” forcefully stimulated people’s desire and passion. All of these push literature into a brand new realm. This was an important spectacle of Chinese literature in the last stage of the 20th century. To use a not-so-accurate metaphor, this was an era of loose bonds. However, this metaphor does not contain a negative connotation when it is compared to the imprisonment

166


of literature in the previous decades. Although we still feel unsatisfied, compared to the past, literature indeed enjoyed an unprecedented degree of freedom. People who enjoyed this freedom should treasure their hard-won right. Unfortunately, the situation nowadays is the opposite. People seem to have lost their self-discipline. Many of them are forgetful of the past; they treat what they have nowadays with a careless attitude.

The half century development of contemporary Chinese literature left people with a hesitant memorial. Its progression was like a man walking through a muddy path overgrown with wild vegetation laboriously, leaving tears, blood, and sweat on the long path. There was passion, sorrow, regret, and enlightenment. Suffering was like the thick clouds that cast a dark shadow on people, but the sunlight that shone through the thick clouds reminded us that life was after all good.

Now, we reflect on the path that we have travelled. Through the misty fog, we discover that we have gained a lot despite the many things that we have lost. Yes, we were once deprived but we have become rich. We own a magnificent spiritual museum if we collect all of the experiences and reflections of several generations of Chinese writers and put them in one place. We are more fortunate than many other people in the world. We gain precious experiences from history. There are glaciers and scars in our hearts. Many people are themselves living fossils. We have many memories and these memories are priceless wealth. Of course, one should not only live in memories but move on. But writers are different; writers are responsible for carrying the weight of history.

Writers smile too. People see life’s hope in the smiles of writers. But writers’ smiles are loaded with life’s weight. This distinguishes writers from ordinary people. A common man can have no sense of history but this is not for a writer. Every Chinese writer naturally feels the heaviness of Chinese history if he does not forget it deliberately. It is an indispensable historical responsibility of every Chinese writer to express this “heaviness” in their own way.

Afterword

168


Afterword for the First Chinese EditionThe Ideological Transformation of 20th Century Chinese Literature is a collection of my comprehensive thoughts on the development of 20th century Chinese literature. In recent years, I began a thematic seminar on modern and contemporary Chinese literature in Peking University’s “critics’ weekends.” Our discussions covered a wide range of issues and became more in-depth later. I published some articles based on our discussions. They are collected in this volume with some previous works.

The third part of this volume, “A New Era of Chinese Literature,” contains the content of another work of mine published in 1988, Wenxue de luse geming 文學的綠

色革命 (Literature’s Green Revolution)—this was the most extended examination of the great change that Chinese literature underwent after the Cultural Revolution. The book has been published for many years and was not reissued. Readers have asked for it but I wasn’t able to respond satisfactorily. This time, I decide to include it in this volume so that my readers can have a better understanding of the development of my thoughts. Fortunately this series of collections were designed to be the authors’ “self-selections,” so my decision does not violate the original plan.

Most of the articles here are firstly anthologized except the part aforementioned. I exclude articles on other topics and focus on the historical development of 20th Century Chinese literature. This is to avoid generalization of the articles collected here so that the theme of this book is clearer. I am glad that it looks like a new publication.

I would like to leave a collection of “self-selections” later. I remember the Xie Mian wenxue pinglun xuan 謝冕文學評論選 (The Collected Literary Criticism of Xie Mian) that was published more than 10 years ago by the Hunan Literature and Art Publishing House. It was a new collection but the content and title were completely different. I still feel a bit uneasy to edit a volume of “self-selections.”

I would like to make use of this opportunity to thank Hebei Educational Publishing House for the staff’s generous support and the laborious work of the chief editor of this volume—they have done a lot of the work that was supposed to be done by myself.

169

Afterword

Afterword for the New Chinese Edition: Sharing the Destiny of the CenturyI left a significant part of my life in the past 20th century, a century in which I experienced life’s suffering, pain, and the joy of rebirth. My life co-exists with the 20th century. The endless wars of the 20th century engulfed countless lives in the world. Of course, it also brought new light of science and humanity to the world. For the Chinese, it was a greatly transformative and soul-stirring century: the thousands of years of the feudal history of China finally came to an end, there began the development of modern China.

The change of times, the rise and demise of an empire, the formation and wreak havoc of imperialism, the prevalence and decline of the proletarian revolution, as well as the opposition of two hegemonic powers—all these topics are too large to grasp fully and examine in-depth. After all the wars and turmoil, the 20th century left with people lingering memories and reflections about the inheritance of culture and its transformation and development. These topics will never become out-of-date but will come to be more necessary over time.

The Ideological Transformation of 20th Century Chinese Literature collected my thoughts on the development of literature and culture of modern China. The writing time for this volume spanned through the whole New Era. This volume was primarily based on two topics: an overall description and reflections on the New Literature Revolution and the New Culture Movement and a study and summarization of the literary changes from the New Era onwards. During the time of the composition of this book, I was hosting the “Critics’ Weekends” for the Chinese Department of Peking University. A great part of the writings and discussions was formed then.

“Critics’ Weekends” began in 1989 and continued until the last year of the 20th century, ending with my retirement. At that time I felt sorrowful for the political unrest and the return of the “Cultural Revolution” mindset and customs. Therefore, I planned to have a quiet corner in Yanyuan where I could escape from the noise of the outside world and discuss with students and friends on finding solutions from Chinese literature and culture to tackle the current situation. For me, it was a kind of comfort for my sense of helplessness.

Time flies; I wrote and published this book many years ago. Fortunately people

170


have not forgotten it. The Renmen University Press decided to republish it. I write these words with a sentiment of remembering an old friend and my gratitude for people’s remembrance of my thoughts.

NotesIntroduction1. Hu Shi, “On New Poetry,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive Theory (Shanghai: Shanghai

Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935), 295.2. Zhou Zuoren, “Human Literature,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive Theory, 193.3. Ibid.4. Lu Xun, “Preface to Call to Arms,” Modern Chinese Literary Thought: Writings on Literature, 1893–1945

(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996), 240.5. Lu Xun, “How I Began Writing Fiction,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4) (Beijing: People’s Literature

Press, 1981), 512.6. Lu Xun, “Random Thoughts no. 40,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 1) (Beijing: People’s Literature

Press, 1981), 322–23.7. Lu Xun, “Diary of a Madman,” The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China: The Complete Fiction of Lu

Xun (London: Penguin, 2009).8. Lu Xun, “How I began Writing Fiction,” 526.9. Cao Yu, Sunrise, A. C. Barnes, trans. (Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1960), 153.10. Yu Dafu, “Sinking,” The Columbia Anthology of Modern Chinese Literature, Joseph S. M. Lau and C. T. Hsia,

trans. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2007), 55.11. Cheng Fangwu, “Accomplish Our Literary Revolution,” The Flood 3, issue 25, 16 January, 1927.12. Ibid.13. Lu Xun, “The crisis of the literary essay,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4), 576–77.14. Ibid.15. Ibid.16. Zheng Zhenduo, “Declaration of the Association for Literary Studies,” Fiction Monthly 12, no. 1, October,

1921.17. Mao Dun, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction I, 4.18. Zheng Boqi, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction III, 9.19. Ibid.20. Cheng Fangwu, “Accomplish Our Literary Revolution.”21. Ibid.22. Cheng Fangwu, “From Literary Revolution to Revolutionary Literature,” Creation Monthly 1, no. 9, 01

February, 1928. In this issue, the editor Wang Duqing wrote in “Words from the Editor for Future Issues of the Magazine”: “‘From Literary Revolution to Revolutionary Literature’ is the most important article. We can even consider it the declaration for a new project that all colleagues and fellow writers should work on.” Zheng Boqi’s play, “Xisheng” 犧牲 (Sacrifice) and Jiang Guangci’s short story “Ju Fen” 菊芬 were published in the same issue. Wang also commented on these two works: “They are imbued with revolutionary emotions.” He further asserted in the essay: “New struggles are going to take place in front of

171

172

Notes

us. Being in such a time of transformation, we should maintain a genuine and clear attitude on whether we want to retreat from or push forward the new era…. We must take on the youthful spirit of the advent of the new era and participate in the frontier of encouraging the coming of the era. We must embrace the gift of the new era by trying our best to actualize it.” The literary works, theories, and editor’s words published in this issue revealed that New Literature established in the May Fourth Movement had changed its direction. Such a change originated in the social change that had already taken place in the Chinese society, which was also the basis for the proposition of the members of the Creation Society. This particular issue represented the mainstream literary strand of the revolutionary literature movement during the 1920s and 1930s, before the outbreak of the Second Anti-Japanese War.

23. Jiang Guangci, “On Revolutionary Literature,” Sun Monthly 2, 1928.24. Mao Zedong, “Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art,” Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Vol. 3)

(Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1991), 864, 856.25. Guo Moruo, “The Dance on the Table,” Creation Monthly 1, no. 11, 01 May, 1928. It was written in the

“Editors Words” of this issue that, “the radical waves of revolutionary literature have reached everywhere. The masses of young intellectuals completely agree on it. We should embark on a new stage hereafter…. For the movement of revolutionary literature, the construction of theories for literature and the actions of works are only different in terms of form. To carry forward guiding theories, to illuminate the followers of the bourgeoisie with guiding theories, and to undermine the illusion of new and old literature are all missions of utmost importance. We should work harder in this aspect in the coming future. Correct theories are never empty; they are powerful gunfire that destroys our enemies.”

26. Guo Moruo, “The Echoes of the Gramophone,” Cultural Critique 3, 1928.27. Li Chuli, “How to Construct Revolutionary Literature,” Cultural Critique 2, 1928.28. Guo Moruo, “A Critique on Reactionary Literature and Art.” Popular Literary Magazine 1, 1948.29. Critical Works of Shao Quanlin (Vol. 1) (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981), 137.30. Guo, “A Critique on Reactionary Literature.”31. “Talks at the Yen’an Forum on Literature and Art,” Selected Works of Mao Tse-Tung (Vol. 3) (Beijing: Foreign

Languages Press, 1967), 73.32. Ibid.33. Zhou Yang, “New Literature and Art for the People.” Collected Works of Zhou Yang (Vol. 1) (Beijing: People’s

Literature Press, 1984).34. In “Xin de renmin de wenyi,” Zhou Yang required writers “to represent active characters more effectively,

and portray heroic role models of the masses; writers should overcome the past defect of literature that the representation of active characters (positive characters) was not as good as the representation of negative characters (villains).” At the same time, he also proposed that writers must “reach the level of the era” and “unite strong political propaganda with profound reflection of life.”

35. “The three prominences” refer to “the foregrounding of positive characters; the foregrounding of heroic characters among positive characters; the foregrounding of major heroic characters among heroic characters.” “The three contrasts” was a phrase that summarized “the use of villains to contrast heroic characters; the use of other positive characters to contrast heroic characters; and the use of descriptions of environment to highlight heroic characters.”

173

Notes

36. “Preface,” Selected Works of Zhang Tianyi (Shanghai: Kaiming Bookshop, 1951).37. “Preface,” Selected Works of Ba Jin (Shanghai: Kaiming Bookshop, 1952).38. In an article about Cao Yu’s creative writing, Huang Yongyu said Cao Yu “has lost his magical jade of

inspiration which is hard to be found again.” He further commented: “What I intend with this metaphor is, Cao Yu has a unique talent of thought and art. He has exceptional sensibility for understanding real life and the art of drama. He can penetrate through people’s soul and understand their personalities and fate.” See Gan Jingcun, “The ‘Epiphany’ of the Drama Master Cao Yu,” Rain Flowers 4, 1998.

39. Selected Works of Mao Tse-Tung (Vol. 3), 871.

Part I1. The Department of Anecdotes of Palace Museum, ed., A Collections of Anecdotes (Beijing: Chung Hwa

Book Co., 1990), 671–72.2. Ibid., 691.3. Chen Duxiu, “To Young People,” A Compilation of Selected Works of Chen Duxiu (Vol. I) (Beijing: Joint

Publishing, 1984), 73–77.4. Chen Duxiu, “The Manifesto of Xin qingnian,” Selected Works of Chen Duxiu (Chengdou: Sichuan

Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2015), 3.5. Cai Yuanpei, “General Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature (Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou,

1935), 11.6. Ibid.7. Hu Shi, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: On Theory (Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou, 1935),

6.8. Kang Youwei, Complete Works of Kang Youwei (Vol. 3) (Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2007),

522.9. Liang Qichao, “On the Relationship between Fiction and Social Governance.” Complete Works of Liang

Qichao (Beijing: Beijing Publishing House, 1999), 886.10. Ibid, 884.11. Qiu Tingliang, “On Vernacular Chinese as the Foundation for Our Reform,” Anthology of Chinese Essays

(Vol. 4) (Shanghai: Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing, 2001), 172.12. Cai, “General Preface,” 9.13. Qin Xuantong, “Letter to Chen Duxiu,” Archives of Duxiu (Shanghai: Ya Dong Books, 1927), 152.14. Chen, “The Manifesto of Xin qingnian,” 3.15. Ibid.16. Chen Duxiu, “A Defense of Xin qingnian,” Selected Works of Chen Duxiu (Chengdou: Sichuan Publishing

House of Literature and Art, 2015), 1.17. Zheng, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction III, 2.18. Yan Fu, “Explanatory Note,” On Liberty (Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1981), ix.19. Zhou, “Human Literature,” 195.20. Hu, “Preface,” 30.21. Zhu Ziqing, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Poetry (Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou,

1935), 2.

174

Notes

22. Lu, “Taking-and-Using-ism,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 6), 41.23. Ibid., 39.24. Liang, Shiqiu, “On the Style of New Poetry and Other Issues,” Poetry Magazine 1, January, 1931.25. Ibid.26. Ibid.27. Zhou Zuoren, “Lenience in Literature,” My Garden (Beijing: Morning Post Publishing, 1923), 5–6.28. Ibid., 6.29. Ibid., 7–8.30. Quoted in Zhou Zuoren, “The Unification of Literature,” My Garden (Beijing: Morning Post Publishing,

1923), 26.31. Ibid.32. Quoted in Zhou, “The Unification of Literature,” 27.33. Zhou, “The Unification of Literature,” 28.34. Ibid., 29.35. Liu, “New Poetry and Old Poetry,” Selected Works of Liu Yazi (Vol 1) (Shanghai: Social Sciences Literature

Press, 2004), 438.

Part II1. Sima Zhongyuan, “Wild Smoke,” The Tomb of Jia La Meng (Taipei: Wenxing Bookshop, 1958).2. Qi Jun, The Silent Moon on Endless River Rolled Away: Selected Works of Qi Jun (Hong Kong: Literary and

Artistic Style Press, 1992).3. Ibid.4. Nie Hualing, “Preface,” Taiwan Anecdotes (Beijing: Beijing Publishing House, 1980).5. Yan Zhen, “Flowers That Are Able to Flourish All Flourish,” Poetry Magazine 1, 1957.6. Selected Poems of Ai Qing (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1984).7. Completed Works of He Qifang (Vol. 6) (Shijiazhuang: Hebei People’s Press, 1998), 7.8. Class Teacher (Beijing: China’s Youth Press, 1979), 18.9. Ibid., 17.10. Han Yu, “‘Preface’ to Jingtan Poetry,” Annotated Prose Works of Han Changli (Shanghai: Shanghai Antique

Books Publishing House, 1986), 262.11. Lu Yao, “Writing Deeper and Wider Works,” Literature Post, 25 August, 1983.12. Gu Hongming, Collected Works of Gu Hongming : The Discourses and Saying of Confucius (Haikou: Hainan

Publishing House, 1996), 443.13. Bai Juyi, “Reading Zhang Ji’s Yuefu Poetry,” Complete Poems of the Tang Dynasty.14. Ibid.15. Cai, “General Preface,” 7.16. Zheng Zhenduo, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions (Shanghai: Shanghai

Liangyou, 1935), 9.17. Cheng Fangwu, “The Mission of New Literature,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary

175

Notes

Contentions, 179.18. Guo Moruo, “Our New Literary Movement,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions,

186–87.19. Cheng Fangwu, “The Social Significance of Art,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions,

188, 191.20. Fu Sinian, “Vernacular Literature and Psychological Reform,” Compendium of China’s New Literature:

Constructive Theory, 205.21. Lu Xun, “Preface,” Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction II (Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou, 1935),

2.22. Cheng Fangwu, “From Literary Revolution to Revolutionary Literature,” Creation Monthly 1, no. 9, 01

February, 1928.23. Zhou Yang, “New Literature and Art for the People,” 514.24. Ibid.25. For example, Feng Zhi wrote in an essay, “On the Direction for the Endeavor of New Poetry,” that: “For the

present, a poet should be a praise-singer; for the future, a poet should be a prophet.” See Literature and Art Post 9, 1958.

26. People’s Literature 1, 1950.27. Jia Ji, “An Issue Regarding ‘Between Husband and Wife,’” Literature and Art Post 4, no.8, 1951.28. Hu, “Preface,” 1.29. Ibsen, Four Great Plays (New York: Bantam Books, 1984), 65.30. Zhou, “Human Literature,” 195.31. Guo Moruo, “The Hero Tree,” Creation Monthly 1, no. 8, March, 1928.32. Ibid.33. Guo Moruo, “The Echoes of the Gramophone,” Cultural Critique 3, 1928.34. Ibid.35. Collected Works of Zhou Yang (Vo. 2), 280.36. Guo Xiaochuan, “A Few Points on ‘To Young Citizens,” On Poems (Shanghai: Shanghai Publishing House

of Literature and Art, 1978).37. Hua Fu, “A Review on Guo Xiaochuan’s ‘Looking at the Starry Sky’,” Literature and Art Post 23, 1959.38. Ibid.39. Ouyang Wenbin, “A Discussion on the Artistic Style of Ru Zhijuan,” Shanghai Literature 10, 1959.

Part III1. Wei Wei, Who Is the Most Lovely Person (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1978).2. Mao Zedong, “On New Democracy,” Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Vol. 2) (Beijing: People’s Publishing

House, 1991), 709.3. It was recorded that this saying of Mao was first pronounced in the 10th Conference of the 8th Central

Committee of the Communist Party of China.—Ed.4. Ai Qing, “Good Job!,” Selected Poems of Ai Qing (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1996), 275–277.5. Poetry Magazine 5, 1958.

176

Notes

6. Chang Hao, “Intellectual change and the reform movement, 1890–8,” The Cambridge History of China (Vol. II): Late Ch’ing , 1800-1911, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 275.

7. Ibid., 276.8. Ibid., 277.9. Shao Dazhen, “My Opinions on the Arguments in the Contemporary Art Circle,” Literary and Artistic

Controversies 6, 1987.10. Lu Xun, “Soundless China,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4) (Beijing: People’s Literature Press,

1981), 15.11. Jin Guantao, Behind the Historical Phenomena (Chengdou: Sichuan People’s Press, 1984).12. Bai Juyi, “Correspondence with Yuan Jiu.”13. Bai Juyi, “‘Preface’ to New Yuefu.”14. Gu Hongming, Collected Works of Gu Hongming : The Discourses and Saying of Confucius (Haikou: Hainan

Publishing House, 1996), 443.15. Please refer to Lu Shuyuan, “On the ‘Inward-Turning’ of New Era Literature,” Literature and Art Post, 18

October, 1986.16. Ibid.17. Ibid.18. Wang Meng, “The Dream of the Sea,” Selected Fictional Works of Wang Meng (Beijing: People’s Literature

Press, 2009).19. Jiang He, “Preface,” Young Poets’ Discussion on Poetry (Beijing: The May Fourth Literary Society of Peking

University, 1985), 26.20. Han Shaogong, “The ‘Root’ of Literature,” The Root of Literature ( Jinan: Shandong Publishing House of

Literature and Art, 2001).21. Zheng Yi, “Transcending the Cultural Fault,” Literature and Art Post, 13 July, 1985.22. A Cheng, “Culture Restrains People,” Literature and Art Post, 6 July, 1985.23. Zheng Yi, “Afterword,” The Distant Village (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1986).24. Ibid.25. Ye Junjian, “Preface,” Initial Exploration of the Techniques of Modern Fiction (Guangzhou: Huacheng Press,

1981).26. Ibid.27. Xu Chi, “Modernization and the Modernist School,” Foreign Literature Studies 1, 1982.28. Feng Jicai, “Chinese Literature Needs the Modernist School,” Shanghai Literature 8, 1982.29. Ibid.30. Lu Xun, “Reflections upon Looking at a Mirror,” The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 1) (Beijing: People’s

Literature Press, 1981), 198.31. Ba Jin, “A Reply Letter,” Shanghai Literature 1, 1983.32. Ibid.33. Bei Dao, “The Island,” Selected Poems of Bei Dao (Guangdong: New Century Press, 1986).34. Wang Meng, “The Night’s Eye,” The Night’s Eye and Other Stories (Guangzhou: Huacheng Press, 1981).35. Zong Pu, “Who Am I,” Collected Works of Zong Pu (Vol. 2) (Beijing: Huayi Publishing House, 1996), 123.

177

Notes

36. Zong Pu, “The Heads in the Mire,” Collected Works of Zong Pu (Vol. 2), 245.37. Can Xue, “Huang Ni Street,” Huang Ni Street: Collected Fictional Works of Can Xue (Beijing: Publishing

House of Minority Nationalities, 2000).38. Han Shaogong, The Father ( Jinan: Shandong Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2001).39. Ibid.40. Chen Duxiu, “French People and Modern Civilization,” The Youth Magazine 1, 15 September, 1915.41. Ibid.42. Ibid.43. Wang Shuqian, “The Question on the New and the Old,” The Youth Magazine 1, 15 September, 1915.44. Ibid.45. Hu, “Preface,” 22.46. The term “the bastards of Tongcheng” refers the Tongcheng school of literati who were active and

dominated China’s literary scene during the Qing dynasty—Ed.47. Hu, “Preface,” 30.48. Zhou, “Human Literature,” 199.49. Hu, “Preface,” 30.50. Guo Moruo, “The Creator,” Creation Quarterly 1, 1 May, 1922.51. He Xin, “Absurdity and the Extra Person in Contemporary Literature: Reading Themeless Variation,” Reading

11, 1985.52. Shao Dazhen, “My Opinions on the Arguments in the Contemporary Art Circle,” Literary and Artistic

Controversies 6, 1987.

Part IV1. “The Communique of the 3rd Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party

of China,” An Anthology of Important Historical Material of the Communist Party of China (Beijing: Chinese Publication Service Center).

2. Ba Jin, “To Welcome the Spring of Socialist Literature and Art,” Literature and Art Post 1, 1978.3. Ibid.4. Zhou Yang, “Learning through Struggles,” Literature and Art Post 1, 1978.5. Xu Chi, “Literature and Modernization,” Literature and Modernization (Chengdou: Sichuan Publishing

House of Literature and Art, 1981).6. Ibid.7. Feng Jicai, “Chinese Literature Needs the Modernist School,” Shanghai Literature 8, 1982.8. Ibid.9. Xie Mian, “No More Playfulness and the Loss of Roots,” Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers 5,

1991.10. Ibid.11. Zhang Yiwu, “Literary Dream: The Future of Chinese Literature,” Journal of Criticism for Contemporary

178

Notes

Writers 5, 1991.12. Meng Fanhua, “Festival for Popular Literature,” Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers 5, 1991.13. Feng Jicai, “The End of an Era,” Free Literary Discussions 3, 1993.

Conclusion1. Zhou, “New Literature and Art for the People,” 514.2. Mao, Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Vol. 3) (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1991), 851, 857.3. Feng Xuefeng, “Objection to Fooling the People, Objection to New Bad Taste,” Literature and Art Post 4, no.

5.4. Ibid.5. Ibid.

BibliographyA Cheng. “Wenhua zhiyue zhe renlei” 文化制約著人類 [Culture Restrains People].

Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post], 6 July, 1985.Ai Qing. “Hao!” 好 [Good Job!]. Ai Qing Shixuan 艾青詩選 [Selected Poems of Ai

Qing]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1996.———. “Jiaoshi” 礁石 (The Reef). Ai Qing shixuan 艾青詩選 [Selected Poems of Ai

Qing]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1984.Ba Jin. “Yifeng huixin” 一封回信 [A Reply Letter]. Shanghai wenxue 上海文學

[Shanghai Literature] 1, 1983.———. “Yingjie shehui zhuyi wenyi de chuntian” 迎接社會主義文藝的春天 [To

Welcome the Spring of Socialist Literature and Art]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 1, 1978.

———. “zixu” 自序 [Preface]. Ba Jin xuanji 巴金選集 [Selected Works of Ba Jin] Shanghai: Kaiming Bookshop, 1952.

Bai, Juyi. “Du Zhang Ji guyuefu” 讀張籍古樂府 [Reading Zhang Ji’s Yuefu Poetry]. Quan Tangshi 全唐詩 [Complete Poems of the Tang Dynasty].

———. “Xin yuefu xu” 新樂府序 [“Preface” to New Yuefu].———. “Yu Yuan Jiu shu” 與元九書 [Correspondence with Yuan Jiu].Bei Dao. “Dao” 島 [The Island]. Bei Dao shixuan 北島詩選 [Selected Poems of Bei

Dao] Guangdong: New Century Press, 1986.Cai, Yuanpei. “Zongxu” 總序 [General Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi 中國新

文學大系 [Compendium of China’s New Literature] Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Can Xue. “Huangni jie” 黃泥街 [Huang Ni Street]. Huangni jie: Can Xue xiaoshuo ji 黃泥街：殘雪小說集 [Huang Ni Street: Collected Fictional Works of Can Xue] (Beijing: Publishing House of Minority Nationalities, 2000.

Cao, Yu. Sunrise. A. C. Barnes, trans. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1960.Chang, Hao. “Intellectual change and the reform movement, 1890–8.” The

Cambridge History of China (Vol. II): Late Ch’ing, 1800-1911, Part 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, Duxiu. “Falanxi ren yu xiandai wenming” 法蘭西人與現代文明 [French People and Modern Civilization]. Qingnian zazhi 青年雜誌 [The Youth Magazine] 1, 15 September, 1915.

———. “Jinggao qingnian” 敬告青年 [To Young People]. Chen Duxiu wenzhang xuanbian 陳獨秀文章選編 [A Compilation of Selected Works of Chen Duxiu (Vol. I)] Beijing: Joint Publishing, 1984.

———. “Xin qingnian xuanyan” 新青年宣言 [The Manifesto of Xin qingnian]. Chen

179

180

Bibliography

Duxiu wenxuan 陳獨秀文選 [Selected Works of Chen Duxiu] Chengdou: Sichuan Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2015.

———. “Xin qingnian zui’an zhi dabianshu” 新青年罪案之答辯書 [A Defense of Xin qingnian]. Chen Duxiu wenxuan 陳獨秀文選 [Selected Works of Chen Duxiu] Chengdou: Sichuan Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2015.

Cheng, Fangwu. “Xinwenxue de shiming” 新文學的使命 [The Mission of New Literature] Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: wenxue lunzheng ji 中國新文學大系：文

學論爭集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

———. “Cong wenxue geming dao geming wenxue” 從文學革命到革命文學 [From Literary Revolution to Revolutionary Literature]. Chuangzao yuekan 創造月

刊 [Creation Monthly] 1, no. 9, 01 February, 1928.———. “Wancheng women de wenxue geming” 完成我們的文學革命 [Accomplish

Our Literary Revolution]. Hongshui 洪水 [The Flood] 3, no. 25, 16 January, 1927.

———. “Yishu zhi shehui de yiyi” 藝術之社會的意義 [The Social Significance of Art]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: wenxue lunzheng ji 中國新文學大系：文學

論爭集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Feng, Jicai. “Yige shidai jieshu le” 一個時代結束了 [The End of an Era]. Wenxue ziyoutan 文學自由談 [Free Literary Discussions] 3, 1993.

———. “Zhongguo wenxue xuyao xiandaipai” 中國文學需要現代派 [Chinese Literature Needs the Modernist School.] Shanghai wenxue 上海文學 [Shanghai Literature] 8, 1982.

Feng, Zhi. “Mantan xinshi nuli de fangxiang” 漫談新詩努力的方向 [On the Direction for the Endeavor of New Poetry]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 9, 1958.

Feng, Xuefeng. “Fandui wannong renmin de taidu, fandui xinde diji quwei” 反對玩弄人民的態度，反對新的低級趣味 [Objection to Fooling the People, Objection to New Bad Taste]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 4, no. 5.

Fu, Sinian. “Baihua wenxue yu xinli de gaige” 白話文學與心理的改革 [Vernacular Literature and Psychological Reform]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: jianshe lilun ji 中國新文學大系：建設理論集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive Theory]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Gan, Jingcun. “Xiju dashi Cao Yu de wu” 戲劇大師曹禺的悟 [The “Epiphany” of the Drama Master Cao Yu]. Yu Hua 雨花 [Rain Flowers] 4, 1998.

Gu, Hongming. Gu Hongming we ji: lunyu yingyi 辜鴻銘文集：論語英譯 [Collected

181

Bibliography

Works of Gu Hongming: The Discourses and Saying of Confucius]. Haikou: Hainan Publishing House, 1996.

Guo, Moruo. “Chuangzao zhe” 創造者 [The Creator]. Chuangzao jikan 創造季刊 [Creation Quarterly] 1, 1 May, 1922.

———. “Chi fandong wenyi” 斥反動文藝 [A Critique on Reactionary Literature and Art]. Dazhong wenyi congkan 大眾文藝叢刊 [Popular Literary Magazine] 1, 1948.

———. “Liushengji de huiyin” 留聲機器的回音 [The Echoes of the Gramophone]. Wenhua pipan 文化批判 [Cultural Critique] 3, 1928.

———. “Women de xinwe xue yundong” 我們的新文學運動 [Our New Literary Movement]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: wenxue lunzheng ji 中國新文學

大系：文學論爭集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

———. “Zhuozi shang de tiaowu” 桌子上的跳舞 [The Dance on the Table]. Chuangzao yuekan 創造月刊 [Creation Monthly] 1, no. 11, 01 May, 1928.

———. “Yingxiongshu” 英雄樹 [The Hero Tree]. Chuangzao yuekan 創造月刊 [Creation Monthly] 1, no. 8, March, 1928.

Guo, Xiaochuan. “Guanyu zhi qingnian gongmin de jidian shuoming” 關於《致

青年公民》的幾點說明 [A Few Points on “To Young Citizens”]. Tanshi 談詩 [On Poems]. Shanghai: Shanghai Publishing House of Literature and Art, 1978.

Han, Shaogong. “Wenxue de gen” 文學的根 [The “Root” of Literature]. Wenxue de gen 文學的根 [The Root of Literature]. Jinan: Shandong Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2001.

———. Bababa 爸爸爸 [The Father]. Jinan: Shandong Publishing House of Literature and Art, 2001.

Han, Yu. “Jingtan changhe shixu” 荊潭唱和詩序 [“Preface” to Jingtan Poetry] . Han Changli wenji xiaozhu 韓昌黎文集校注 [Annotated Prose Works of Han Changli]. Shanghai: Shanghai Antique Books Publishing House, 1986.

He, Qifang. “Huida” 回答 [Reply]. He Qifang quanji (diliujuan) 何其芳全集（第六

卷）[Complete Works of He Qifang (Vol. 6)] Shijiazhuang: Hebei People’s Press, 1998.

He, Xin. “Dangdai wenxue zhong de huangmiugan yu duoyuzhe—du wuzhuti bianzou” 當代文學中的荒謬感與多餘者—讀《無主題變奏》[Absurdity and the Extra Person in Contemporary Literature: Reading Themeless Variation]. Dushu 讀書 [Reading] 11, 1985.

Hu, Shi. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: jianshe lilun ji 中國新文學

大系：建設理論集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive

182

Bibliography

Theory]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.———. “Tan xinshi” 談新詩 [On New Poetry]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: jianshe

lilun ji 中國新文學大系：建設理論集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive Theory]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Hua, Fu. “Ping Guo Xiaochuan de wangxingkong” 評郭小川的望星空 [A Review on Guo Xiaochuan’s “Looking at the Starry Sky”]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 23, 1959.

Ibsen, Henrik. “A Doll’s House.” Four Great Plays. New York: Bantam Books, 1984.Jia, Ji. “Guanyu yingpian women fufu zhijian de yige wenti” 關於影片《我們夫

婦之間》的一個問題 [An Issue Regarding “Between Husband and Wife”]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 4, no.8, 1951.

Jiang, Guangci. “Guanyu geming wenxue” 關於革命文學 [On Revolutionary Literature]. Taiyang yuekan 太陽月刊 [Sun Monthly] 2, 1928.

Jiang He. “Xiaoxu” 小序 [Preface]. Qingnian shiren tanshi 青年詩人談詩 [Young Poets’ Discussion on Poetry] Beijing: The May Fourth Literary Society of Peking University, 1985.

Jin, Guantao. Zai lishi de biaoxiang beihou 在歷史的表象背後 [Behind the Historical Phenomena]. Chengdou: Sichuan People’s Press, 1984.

Kang, Youwei. Kang Youwei quanji (disanjuan) 康有為全集（第三卷）[Complete Works of Kang Youwei (Vol. 3)]. Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2007.

Li, Chuli. “Zenyang di jianshe geming wenxue” 怎樣地建設革命文學 [How to Construct Revolutionary Literature]. Wenhua pipan 文化批判 [Cultural Critique] 2, 1928.

Liang, Qichao. “Lun xiaoshuo yu qunzhi zhi guanxi” 論小說與群治之關係 (On the Relationship between Fiction and Social Governance) Liang Qichao quanji 梁啟超全集 [Complete Works of Liang Qichao]. Beijing: Beijing Publishing House, 1999.

Liang, Shiqiu. “Xinshi de gediao ji qita” 新詩的格調及其他 [On The Style of New Poetry and Other Issues]. Shikan 詩刊 [Poetry Magazine] 1, January, 1931.

Liu, Xinwu. Banzhuren 班主任 [Class Teacher]. Beijing: China’s Youth Press, 1979.Liu, Yazi. “Xinshi he jiushi” 新詩和舊詩 [New Poetry and Old Poetry]. Liu Yazi

wenji 柳亞子文集 [Selected Works of Liu Yazi (Vol 1)]. Shanghai: Social Sciences Literature Press, 2004.

Lu Xun. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: xiaoshuo erji 中國新

文學大系：小說二集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction II]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

———. “Diary of a Madman,” The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China:

183

Bibliography

The Complete Fiction of Lu Xun. London: Penguin, 2009.———. “Kanjing yougan” 看鏡有感 [Reflections upon Looking at a Mirror]. Lu

Xun quanji (diyijuan) 魯迅全集（第一卷）[The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 1)] Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

———. “Nalai zhuyi” 拿來主義 [Taking-and-Using-ism]. Lu Xun quanji (diliujuan) 魯迅全集（第六卷） [The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 6)] Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

———. “Preface to Call to Arms.” Modern Chinese Literary Thought: Writings on Literature, 1893–1945. Yang Xianyi and Gladys Yang, trans. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996.

———. “Suiganlu sishi” 隨感錄四十 [Random Thoughts no. 40] Lu Xun quanji (diyijuan) 魯迅全集（第一卷）[The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 1)] Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

———. “Wo zenme zuoqi xiaoshuo lai” 我怎麼做起小說來 [How I Began Writing Fiction] 魯迅全集（第四卷）[The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4)]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

———. “Wusheng de Zhongguo” 無聲的中國 [Soundless China]. Lu Xun quanji (disijuan) 魯迅全集（第四卷）[The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4)]. (Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

———. “Xiaopinwen de weiji” 小品文的危機 [The crisis of the literary essay]. Lu Xun quanji (disijuan) 魯迅全集（第四卷）[The Complete Works of Lu Xun (Vol. 4)]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

Lu, Shuyuan. “Lun xinshiqi wenxue de xiangneizhuan” 論新時期文學的向內轉 [On the “Inward-Turning” of New Era Literature]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post], 18 October, 1986.

Lu, Yao. “Shi zuopin geng shen geng kuankuo xie” 使作品更深更寬闊些 [Writing Deeper and Wider Works]. Wenxuebao 文學報 [Literature Post], 25 August, 1983.

Mao Dun. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: xiaoshuo yiji 中國新

文學大系：小說一集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction I]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Mao, Zedong. “Xin minzhu zhuyi lun” 新民主主義論 [On New Democracy,]. Mao Zedong xuanji (di’erjuan) 毛澤東選集（第二卷）[Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Vol. 2)]. (Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1991.

———. “Zai Yan’an we yi zuotanhui shang de jianghua” 在延安文藝座談會上的

講話 [Talks at the Yan’an Forum on Literature and Art]. Mao Zedong xuanji (disanjuan) 毛澤東選集（第三卷）[Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Vol. 3)]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1991.

Meng, Fanhua. “Pingmin wenxue de jieri” 平民文學的節日 [Festival for Popular

184

Bibliography

Literature]. Dangdai zuojia pinglun 當代作家評論 [Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers] 5, 1991.

Nie Hualing, “Qianyan” 前言 [Preface]. Taiwan yishi 台灣軼事 [Taiwan Anecdotes]. Beijing: Beijing Publishing House, 1980.

Ouyang, Wenbin. “Shilun Ru Zhijuan de yishu fengge” 試論茹志鵑的藝術風格 [A Discussion on the Artistic Style of Ru Zhijuan]. Shanghai Wenxue 上海文學 [Shanghai Literature] 10, 1959.

Qi Jun. “Changgou liuyue qu wusheng” 長溝流月去無聲 [The Silent Moon on Endless River Rolled Away] Zhanggou liuyue qu wusheng: Qi Jun xuanji 長溝流月去無聲：琦君選集 [The Silent Moon on Endless River Rolled Away: Selected Works of Qi Jun]. Hong Kong: Literary and Artistic Style Press, 1992.

Qin, Xuantong. “Zhi Chen Duxiu de xin” 致陳獨秀的信 [Letter to Chen Duxiu]. Duxiu wencun 獨秀文存 [Archives of Duxiu]. Shanghai: Ya Dong Books, 1927.

Qiu, Tingliang. “Lun baihua wei weixin zhi ben” 論白話為維新之本 [On Vernacular Chinese as the Foundation for Our Reform]. Zhongguo lidai wenlun xuan 中國歷代文論選 [Anthology of Chinese Essays (Vol. 4)]. Shanghai: Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing, 2001.

Shao, Dazhen. “Dangqian meishujie zhenglun zhi wojian” 當前美術界爭論之我見. [My Opinions on the Arguments in the Contemporary Art Circle]. Wenyi zhengming 文藝爭鳴 [Literary and Artistic Controversies] 6, 1987.

Sho, Quanlin. Shao Quanlin pinglun xuanji 邵荃麟評論選集 [Critical Works of Shao Quanlin (Vol. 1)]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1981.

Sima, Zhongyuan. “Yeyan” 野煙 [Wild Smoke]. Jialameng zhimu 加拉猛之墓 [The Tomb of Jia La Meng]. Taipei: Wenxing Bookshop, 1958.

The Department of Anecdotes of Palace Museum. Ed. Zhanggu congbian 掌故叢編 [A Collections of Anecdotes]. Beijing: Chung Hwa Book Co., 1990.

Wang, Meng. “Hai de meng” 海的夢 [The Dream of the Sea]. Wangmeng xiaoshuo xuan 王蒙小說選 [Selected Fictional Works of Wang Meng]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 2009.

———. “Ye de yan” 夜的眼 [The Night’s Eye] Ye de yan ji qita 夜的眼及其他 [The Night’s Eye and Other Stories]. Guangzhou: Huacheng Press, 1981.

Wang, Shuqian. “Xinjiu wenti” 新舊問題 [The Question on the New and the Old]. [The Youth Magazine] 1, 15 September, 1915.

Wei Wei. Shuishi zui ke’ai de ren 誰是最可愛的人 [Who Is the Loveliest Person]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1978.

Xiao, Yemu. “Women fufu zhijian” 我們夫婦之間 [Between Husband and Wife]. Renmin wenxue 人民文學 [People’s Literature ] 1, 1950.

185

Bibliography

Xie, Mian. “Tingzhi youxi yu zaidu piaoliu” 停止遊戲與再度漂流 [No More Playfulness and the Loss of Roots]. Dangdai zuojia pinglun 當代作家評論 [Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers] 5, 1991.

Xu, Chi. “Xiandaihua yu xiandaipai” 現代化與現代派 [Modernization and the Modernist School]. Waiguo wenxue yanjiu 外國文學研究 [Foreign Literature Studies] 1, 1982.

———. Wenyi he xiandaihua 文藝和現代化 [Literature and Modernization]. Chengdou: Sichuan Publishing House of Literature and Art, 1981.

Yan, Fu. “Yifanli”譯凡例 [Explanatory Note.] Qunji quanjie lun 群己權界論 [On Liberty]. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1981.

Yan, Zhen. “Fanshi nengkai dehua, quanzai kaifang” 凡是能開的花，全在開

放 [Flowers That Are Able to Flourish All Flourish]. Shikan 詩刊 [Poetry Magazine] 1, 1957.

Ye, Junjian. “Qianyan” 前言 [Preface]. Xia dai xiaoshuo jiqiao chutan 現代小說技巧初

探 [Initial Exploration of the Techniques of Modern Fiction]. Guangzhou: Huacheng Press, 1981.

Yu, Dafu. “Sinking.” The Columbia Anthology of Modern Chinese Literature. Joseph S. M. Lau and C. T. Hsia, trans. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

Zhang, Tianyi. “Zixu” 自序 [Preface]. Zhang Tianyi xuanji 張天翼選集 [Selected Works of Zhang Tianyi]. Shanghai: Kaiming Bookshop, 1951.

Zhang, Yiwu. “Xiezuo zhimeng: hanyu wenxue de weilai” 寫作之夢：漢語文學

的未來 [Literary Dream: The Future of Chinese Literature]. Dangdai zuojia pinglun 當代作家評論 [Journal of Criticism for Contemporary Writers] 5, 1991

Zheng, Boqi. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: xiaoshuo sanji 中國

新文學大系：小說三集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Fiction III]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Zheng, Yi. “Houji” 後記 [Afterword]. Yuancun 遠村 [The Distant Village]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1986.

———. “Kuayue wenhua duanliedai” 跨越文化斷裂帶 [Transcending the Cultural Fault]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post], 13 July, 1985.

Zheng, Zhenduo. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: wenxue lunzheng ji 中國新文學大系：文學論爭集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Literary Contentions]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

———. “Wenxue yanjiuhui xuanyan” 文學研究會宣言 [Declaration of the Association for Literary Studies]. Xiaoshuo yuekan 小說月刊 [Fiction Monthly] 12, no. 1, October, 1921.

186

Bibliography

“Zhonggong di shiyijie zhongyang weiyuanhui disanci quanti huiyi gongbao” 中共第十一屆中央委員會第三次全體會議公報 [The Communique of the 3rd Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China]. Zhonggong zhongyao lishi wenxian ziliao huibian 中共重要歷史文獻資

料彙編 [An Anthology of Important Historical Material of the Communist Party of China]. Beijing: Chinese Publication Service Center.

Zhou, Yang. “Fayang wusi wenxue geming de zhandou chuantong” 發揚五四文

學革命的戰鬥傳統 [To Develop the Tradition of the Battling Spirit of the May Fourth Literary Revolution]. Zhou Yang wenji (di’erjuan) 周揚文集（第

二卷）[Collected Works of Zhou Yang (Vo. 2)]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1984.

———. “Xin de renmin de wenyi” 新的人民的文藝 [New Literature and Art for the People]. Zhou Yang wenji (diyijuan) 周揚文集（第一卷）[Collected Works of Zhou Yang (Vol. 1)]. Beijing: People’s Literature Press, 1984.

———. “Zai douzheng zhong xuexi” 在鬥爭中學習 [Learning through Struggles]. Wenyibao 文藝報 [Literature and Art Post] 1, 1978.

Zhou, Zuoren. “Ren de wenxue” 人的文學 [Human Literature]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: jianshe lilun ji 中國新文學大系: 建設理論集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Constructive Theory]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

———. “Wenxue de kuanrong” 文學的寬容 [Lenience in Literature]. Ziji de yuandi 自己的園地 [My Garden]. Beijing: Morning Post Publishing, 1923.

———. “Wenxue de tongyi” 文學的統一 [The Unification of Literature]. Ziji de yuandi 自己的園地 [My Garden]. Beijing: Morning Post Publishing, 1923.

Zhu, Ziqing. “Daoyan” 導言 [Preface]. Zhongguo xinwenxue daxi: shiji 中國新文學

大系：詩集 [Compendium of China’s New Literature: Poetry]. Shanghai: Shanghai Liangyou Fuxing Book Publishing Co., 1935.

Zong Pu. “Wo shi shui” 我是誰 [Who Am I]. Zong Pu wenji (juan er) 宗璞文集（

卷二） [Collected Works of Zong Pu (Vol. 2)] Beijing: Huayi Publishing House, 1996.

———. “Nizhao zhong de toulu” 泥沼中的頭顱 [The Heads in the Mire]. Zong Pu wenji (juan er) 宗璞文集（卷二）[Collected Works of Zong Pu (Vol. 2).] Beijing: Huayi Publishing House, 1996.

Indexabsurdity 50, 85, 108, 117, 122, 133, 177, 181A Cheng 99, 176, 179active characters 172aesthetic pursuits 7–8, 59, 114agriculture 138, 140, 151Ai Qing 7, 39, 55, 76, 174–75, 179alienation 52, 108, 117, 120, 122ancient 13, 29, 85, 87, 109–10, 141, 155anti-asceticism 102Association for Literary Studies 7, 9, 59, 159,

171, 185

Ba Jin 17, 39, 111, 139, 155, 176–77, 179Bai Juyi 58, 174, 176Bei Dao 100–101, 115, 121, 136, 176, 179Beiyang Fleet 24Bing Xin 47, 39, 106

Cai Qijiao 78Cai Yuanpei 27–28, 33, 173–74, 179Cao Yu 17, 39, 152, 154, 171, 173capitalism 9, 61, 68, 75, 87, 114, 117Celestial Empire 22–23characters national 81, 109 positive 172Chen Duxiu 31, 36, 127, 173, 177, 179–80,

civilization metropolitan 153 rural 152–53class struggle 8–9, 61, 78, 92, 95, 160collectivism 10–12, 15–16, 66–67, 154, 162Communist Party 16, 62–64, 78, 138, 151,

156–57, 175, 177, 186Confucian literary tradition 58, 91Confucianism 31–33, 36, 39, 43, 58, 72, 92Confucius 105, 174, 176, 181Creation Society 8–9, 59–60, 172Crescent Moon 8, 41, 106cultural character 83, 85–88, 90, 106, 124 conservative 89 negative 85, 88cultural interactions 42, 102, 130cultural loss 98–99cultural mentality 82–83, 103Cultural Revolution 17–19, 42, 50–51, 56,

62, 64, 68, 72, 81–82, 87–89, 129–31,

187

184Cheng Fangwu 8–9, 171, 174–75Chen Rong 56China’s Literary Association 138–39China’s modernist literature 108, 110Chinese literati 22, 80, 91Chinese literature’s modernism 117Chinese mentality 3, 41, 55, 124–25, 159Christian missionaries 80

138–39, 147, 158–60, 164–65culture new 29, 77, 109, 127 rural 152, 155–56

Dai Wangshu 39, 114democracy 26–27, 31, 33, 43, 59, 107democratic thoughts 26–28, 43–44

economy 138, 142, 148, 153, 158, 165emancipation 3, 7, 10, 37Empress Dowager Cixi 24everyday life 2, 145

188

Index

intellectuals 4, 10, 15, 25, 28–30, 32–34, 39, 44, 62–63, 73–74, 91, 99, 109, 111, 152–53

conservative 82–83 metropolitan 152–53interferences 42, 107, 143international vision 128, 134inward-turning tendency 95

Jiang Guangci 10, 39, 171–72Jigong zhuan 86

Kafka 108–9Kang Youwei 24, 30, 173, 182

Lao She 17, 39, 106, 154–55Li Jinfa 39, 113–14Liang Qichao 5, 28, 30, 173, 182Liang Shiqiu 40–41literary criticism 8–9, 109, 131, 144, 163literary development 83, 95, 97, 103, 139,

143, 150–151, 161, 164literary forms 3, 36–37, 55, 74, 83literary movements 5, 10, 22, 35, 46, 131,

134, 141–42, 147, 153, 164literary order 78, 104, 133 existing 95, 115, 118, 121 unified 164literary revolution 2, 8–10, 26, 28, 35, 61,

127–29, 131, 133, 135–36, 151, 156,

164, 171, 180literary styles 13, 34, 130, 162literary tradition 150–151literary utilitarianism 62literature functions of 7, 59–60 living 35–36, 65, 127 modernist 108–10, 113–14, 124–25 politicization of 102, 130

Feng Jicai 110, 142, 176–78feudalism 9, 26, 31, 68, 75, 87, 117, 131feudalistic mentality 85First World War 26, 38foreign culture 39–43, 80–82, 85, 107foreign literature 39, 41, 123, 130foreign modernist writers 109foreigners 40, 58, 82, 106fossilized spirit 71–72freedom 4, 7, 9, 18–19, 43–47, 59–60, 65,

73, 101–2, 105, 107, 116, 165–66

Gao Xinjian 110, 142Great Leap, the 50, 67, 77, 158, 160Guangdong 22, 176, 179Guangxu 23–24Guangzhou 176, 184–85Guo Moruo 2, 7, 11–12, 17, 32, 39, 65, 106,

155, 172, 175, 177Guo Xiaochuan 66–67, 175, 182

Han Shaogong 98, 176–77Hemingway 109He Qifang 39, 174, 181homelessness 53–54homesickness 54homogeneity 88–89, 132, 135, 143Hu Shi 3, 14, 28–29, 35, 37, 65, 127–28, 171,

173human literature 4, 6, 11, 35, 37, 43, 65–66,

128, 171, 173, 175, 177, 186 promotion of 6, 10, 37, 45humanism 4, 37, 65Hundred Days’ Reform 24, 26, 28–29Hundred Flowers Campaign 63–64

individualism 4, 10–12, 15–17, 37, 43, 65–67, 154

individuality 8, 16, 37, 45–46, 50, 66, 70, 154, 162

189

Index

rural 155–56 world 39, 72, 75, 107, 109–10, 131, 135literature and modernization 140, 177, 185literature for art’s sake 8, 59, 61literature for life’s sake 13, 59–60, 151, 155,

159literature of tears and blood 45Li Tuo 110, 124, 142Liu Bannong 33, 47, Liu Qing 155Liu Xinwu 19, 56, 110, 182Lu Xun 2, 5–8, 32, 39–40, 43, 59–60, 73–74,

87, 105–6, 124–26, 155–56, 159, 171, 175–76, 182–83

magical realist works 109Mainland China 51, 54–55, 58Mao Dun 9, 17, 39, 68, 113, 155, 171, 183Mao Zedong 11–12, 15–16, 18, 70, 72, 152–

54, 172, 175, 178, 183market economy 18–19, 145, 147, 165Marxist theory 9May Fourth 7, 11, 17, 31, 37, 44, 51, 60, 62,

66, 74, 99, 127, 129, 135–36May Fourth Movement 2, 4–5, 8, 10, 14, 19,

26–29, 31, 33, 35, 39–40, 58–59, 81, 133–34, 164–65

May Fourth period 68, 70, 85, 106–7, 115, 117, 128, 143, 152, 159, 164

Misty Poetry 34, 82, 95, 109, 132–33, 135, 142, 153

Misty Poetry Movement 94, 115, 133model opera 68, 72, 79, 89, 130, 160–61modern civilization 4, 31, 39, 43, 107, 127,

177, 179modernism 8, 107–8, 111, 113–14, 117,

120, 122, 124, 141–42modernist art 108, 110–111, 126modernization 41, 84, 109–10, 117, 120,

138, 140–141, 143, 176–77, 185

nation 3–4, 6, 10, 19, 28–31, 33–35, 39, 52–53, 58–59, 81, 92–93, 104–6, 109, 151, 158–59

nature 7, 14, 44, 46, 58, 61–62, 67, 107, 124, 129, 131, 141–42, 147, 161

New China 6, 70, 152, 158New Culture Movement 27–28, 31, 169New Literature 2–4, 6–7, 12–14, 16–19,

26–33, 35, 37, 39–47, 59–60, 127–29, 150, 155–56, 171–75, 179–83, 185–86

new poetry 3, 7, 13, 36, 40–41, 47, 77–78, 82, 97, 99, 140, 153, 174–75, 180, 182

Nie Hualing 54

old culture 41, 76–77, 81, 109, 127old poetry 36, 43, 47, 109, 174, 182

Pai Hsien-yung 54People’s Republic of China 15, 55, 70, 73–74petit bourgeois 82, 87 consciousness 11 intellectuals 154 thought or emotion 16 writers 12poetry, modernist 82policies, closed-door 40, 81popular literature 103, 144–45popularization 55, 71–72, 134proletariats 65, 72propaganda 63, 94, 102

Qi Jun 53, 174, 184Qianlong 22, 25Qing dynasty 22–24, 177

Reactionary Literature 12, 172, 181realism 6, 8, 71, 91, 93–94, 111, 113–14,

118–19, 130, 132, 159reform 24, 26, 28, 30, 42, 81–82, 84, 91, 95,

102, 107, 142, 153, 157, 173

190

Index

101, 127tragedies 6, 54, 64, 92, 163turmoil, political 24, 117, 158–59, 161, 164

unification 76, 89, 153, 158, 162unified political machine 165utilitarianism, social 60, 64, 151–52

vernacular Chinese 2–3, 18, 30, 36–37, 40, 47, 50, 99, 127, 135, 173

vernacular language 18, 28–30, 35–36, 45, 127

Wang Meng 64, 96–97, 110, 118, 176Western civilization 42, 127Western culture 40–41, 87Western modernism 108, 113, 115–17, 123,

135, 141Worker-peasant-soldier literature in New

Literature 15

Xiao Yemu 63–64, 152, 157Xin qingnian 14, 27, 32, 37, 128, 159, 173,

179–80Xu Chi 110, 120, 140, 176–77Xungen 101 Movement 98–99 Literature 147Xu Zhimo 39, 47, 106

Yan Fu 35–36, 173Yang Mo 70Ye Junjian 110, 176Youth Magazine 127, 177, 179, 184Yu Dafu 7, 39, 46, 171, 185Yu Guangzhong 54

Zhang Jie 19, 83, 120Zhang Tianyi 17, 39, 185Zhang Yiwu 144–45, 177

cultural 58, 81 national 24restrictions, formal 3, 36revolutionary literature 10–11, 15, 60, 65, 73,

131, 160, 171–72, 175, 180romanticism 113–15

Scar Literature 56, 78, 132, 147, 159School of Mandarin Ducks and Butterflies

59Second World War 51, 53, 72–73, 117self-criticism 17, 154self-reform 73–74Shanghai 152, 171, 173–75, 179–86Shen Congwen 39, 106, 155sick man of East Asia 5Sima Zhongyuan 53social changes 70, 131, 134, 138–40, 159,

162, 172social environment 19, 22, 74, 88, 142social psychology 145–47social responsibility 8, 16, 43, 60, 93socialism, modern construction of 138Socialist Literature 139–40, 177, 179society ancient Chinese 58 backwardness of 29, 91 modern Chinese 50 old Chinese 73, 113 post-war Chinese 56socio-political machine 160sovereignty 26, 36–38strangeness 83, 93, 130Sun Li 155–56

Taiwan 51–54, 58, 65, 73, 150Taiwanese literature 53–54Tan Sitong 59Tiananmen 26traditional culture 33, 39–41, 82–83, 85, 99,

191

Index

Zhao Shuli 155–56Zheng Boqi 33, 171Zheng Yi 99, 101, 176Zhou Zuoren 4, 37, 39, 43, 45–46, 65, 71,

128, 171, 173–75, 177–78, 186Zhu Ziqing 32, 37, 40, 173Zong Pu 70, 109, 118, 176–77, 186

the ideological transformation of 20th century chinese literature

Documents