The Genesis of Modern Chinese Literary Criticism (1917–1930)

Marián Gálik

• Verlag: Routledge
• Jahr: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000583175
• Auflage: 1
• Thema: Ciencias sociales
• Thema: Estudios regionales

This book, first published in 1980, is a history of modern Chinese literary criticism between the years 1917 and 1930. It examines its development within the overall frame of reference of Chinese national literature from the beginnings of the Chinese literary revolution in 1917 until the end of the first efforts at a revolutionary proletarian literature in 1930. Chinese literary criticism is also analysed within the framework of world literature, of world literary thought, especially of the impact of the progressive literary criticism.

CHAPTER One Hu Shih, Chou Tso-Jen, Ch'en Tu-Hsiu and The Beginning of Modern Chinese Literary Criticism

Modern Chinese literary criticism dates from January 1917. It has its prehistory reaching back to at least the year 1898 when Liang Ch’i-ch’ao (1874–1929) wrote I-yin cheng-chih hsiao-shuo hsü (Preface to the Translated Political Novel). This was a foreword written for the Chinese translation of the Japanese novel by Shiba Shiro (1825–1922), Kajin no kigu (The Strange Adventures of the Beauty).¹ Another of Liang’s significant articles from the year 1902 entitled Lun hsiao-shuo yü ch’un-chih kuan-hsi (The Relation of Novel to Politics)² was followed by critical and aesthetic works by Wang Kuo-wei (1877–1927),³ in particular his well-known study Hung-lou-meng p’ing-lun (Contribution to a Discussion on the Dream of the Red Chamber) from the year 1904, and finally articles by young Lu Hsün (1881–1936), especially his Mo-lo shih-li shuo (On Satanic Power of Poetry) from the year 1908.⁴

¹ See Gálik, M.: On the Influence of Foreign Ideas on Chinese Literary Criticism (1898–1904). AAS, II, 1966, p. 39. Also Lee, M.: Liang Ch’i-ch’ao (1873–1929) and the Literary Revolution of Late Ch’ing. In: Search for Identity. Modern Literature and the Creative Arts in Asia, p. 209. ² See Martin, H.: A Transitional Concept of Chinese Literature 1897–1917. Liang Ch’i-ch’ao on Poetry-Reform, Historical Drama and the Political Novel. Oriens Extremus, 20, 2, 1973, pp. 178–189. This is probably the best treatment of the “prehistory” of modern Chinese literary criticism in English as far as Liang Ch’i-ch’ao is concerned. A very good bibliography of Japanese and Chinese works is on p. 209 of this article. Dr. Martin does not mention the pioneering work by Wu Wen-cht entitled Chin-pai-nien lai-ti Chung-kuo wen-i ssu-ch’ao (Chinese Literary Mind in the Last Hundred Years). Hsüeh-lin, 1, November 1940, pp. 3–22 and 2, December 1940, pp. 153–159. On the theory of fiction of this period see Semanov, V. I.: Teoria prozy v Kitaie na rubezhe XIX-XX vekov (The Theory of Fiction in China at the End of the 19th and at the Beginning of the 20th Century). In: Problemy teorii literatury i estetiki ν stranakh Vostoka (The Problems of the Theory of Literature and Aesthetics in Oriental Countries). Moscow 1964, pp. 161–206. ³ Gálik, M.: On the Influence of Foreign Ideas on Chinese Literary Criticism (1898–1904), pp. 42–47 and Smythe, E. J.: The Early Thought of Wang Kuo-wei: An Analysis of His Essays on German Voluntaristic Philosophy (1903–1907), Papers on China, 18, 1964, where Wang Kuo-wei’s exposition of Schopenhauer’s aesthetics is to be found on pp. 9–14. See also a very good treatment of the subject in Golygina, K. I.: Teoria iziashchnoi slovesnosti ν Kitaie (The Theory of Literature in China). Moscow, Nauka 1971, pp. 216–243. ⁴ The best study on the young Lu Hsün as a literary critic, as far as we know, is an unpublished M. A. thesis by A. Castro entitled Four Early Essays of Lu Hsün (school of Oriental and African Studies, London 1968). Very short reviews of Lu Hsün’s articles of this time can be found in many different works devoted to Lu Hsün. A more profound study is a part of the book by Sorokin, V. F.: Formirovanie mirovozrenia Lu Sinia (The Formation of Lu Hsün’s World-View). Moscow 1958, pp. 33–54.

1

In January 1917, Hu Shih published, in the journal Hsin ch’ing-nien (New Youth), the famous article Wen-hsüeh kai-liangch’u-i (A Preliminary Discussion on Literary Reform) which became the “manifesto” of the modern Chinese literary revolution.⁵ In it Professor Hu expressed 6 propositions and 2 commands which he later modified somewhat and named pa-pu chu-i (eight-don’ts-ism):

“

1. What you write should have a real substance
2. Do not imitate the writings of ancients
3. Follow literary grammar
4. Do not write that you are sick and sad when you are not
5. Discard time-worn literary phrases
6. Do not use classical allusions
7. Do not use parallel construction of sentences
8. Do not avoid using vernacular words and speech.⁶

”

Hu Shih’s eight-don’ts-ism recalls one of the manifestos of the American imagism whose author was Ezra Pound.⁷ Attention to this fact was drawn by Liang Shih-ch’iu in 1927.⁸ As a matter of fact, the two manifestos resemble each other in many points. Of course, the Chinese one corresponded to the specific Chinese needs which had to be satisfied during the course of the literary revolution.

In the case of the American imagists and of Hu Shih, one may speak of the influence of foreign systemo-structural entity and Chinese response. Similarly, as in the case of the imagists, the new Chinese literature Hu Shih endeavoured to bring to life was to represent the systemo-structural reality predominantly of an artistic and formal nature.

When asked “what is literature?”, Hu Shih replied very simply, but also inadequately:

⁵ Original text published in HCN, 2, 5, pp. 1–12 was often reprinted, e.g. in WHTH, 1, pp. 34–43. The article was translated into English and published in an abridged form in Th. Wm . de Bary (Ed.): Sources of Chinese Tradition. New York-London, Columbia University Press 1960, pp. 820–824. For more on Hu Shih’s life and work, see Grieder, J. B.: Hu Shih and the Chinese Renaissance. Liberalism in the Chinese Revolution, 1917–1937. Cambridge, Harvard University Press 1970, 420 pp. ⁶ Hu Shih: A Preliminary Discussion of Literary Reform. WHTH, 1, p. 34. ⁷ Eliot, T. S. (Ed.): Literary Essays of Ezra Pound. Glasgow 1954, pp. 4–7. ⁸ Liang Shih-chiu: Hsien-tai Chung-kuo wen-hsüeh-chihlang-man-ti ch’ü-shih (Romantic Tendency in Modern Chinese Literature). In: Lang-man-tiyii ku-tien-ti (Classic and Romantic). Shanghai 1927, p. 5.

“Language and writing are tools of mankind for expressing its thoughts and feelings. If it expresses the one well and the other beautifully, then it is literature.”⁹

Or:

“Literature without emotion or thought is like a beautiful woman without mind or soul; despite a richly beautiful appearance, there is nothing really there.”¹⁰

Real substance (wu), the first of the requirements of literature expressed above, was to consist of feelings (kan-ch’ing) and of thought (ssu-hsiang).

Hu Shih characterized feelings (or emotions) by a part of the definition of poetry from the “Great Preface” of the Mao Edition of the Book of Poetry (Mao shih “Ta hsü”):

“When one’s emotions move within, they are expressed in words; when words are inadequate, one may use exclamations to express them; when exclamations are inadequate, one may express them in song by prolonging the sounds; when singing is inadequate, one may unconsciously express them in dance by gesturing with one’s hand and beating with one’s feet.”¹¹

According to Hu Shih, feelings are “the soul of literature”.¹² Literature without feelings is but “a walking corpse”.¹³

Hu Shih characterizes thought by its three components: insight (chien-ti), knowledge (shih-li) and ideals (li-hsiang).¹⁴

“Thought does not necessarily depend on literature for transmission, but literature becomes more valuable if it contains thought and thought is more valuable if it possesses literary value.”¹⁵

A pity though that Hu Shih failed to write more explicitly on what he understood by “literary value” or to characterize his concept of “thought” in more detail. As examples of “valuable literature” of this type he cited Chuang-tzu’s works, then the poems by T’ao Yüan-ming (365–427) and Tu Fu (712–770), the tz’u form of poetry by Hsin Ch’i-chi (1140–1207) and Shih Nai-an’s (fl. 14th cent.) novel Shui hu chuan (Water Margin).¹⁶

The emphasis which Hu Shih repeatedly lays on thought and feeling is in some way reminiscent of intellectual and emotional elements in literature about which C. T. Winchester wrote towards the end of the last century.¹⁷ Even though the principle: nothing but feelings and thought,¹⁸ creates the base for all his reflections on literature, he also imparts the imaginative element to his literary conception. However, imagination according to him must derive from what he has termed “real substance”...

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Introduction
• 1 Hu Shih, Chou Tso-jen, Ch’en Tu-hsiu and the Beginning of Modern Chinese Literary Criticism
• 2 Kuo Mo-jo and his Development from Aesthetico-impressionist to Proletarian Criticism
• 3 Ch’eng Fang-wu and his Development from Socio-aesthetic to “Total Criticism”
• 4 Yii Ta-fu and his Panaesthetic Criticism
• 5 Teng Chung-hsia, Yiin Tai-ying, Hsiao Ch’u-nii and the Beginning of Concerned Literary Criticism
• 6 Chiang Kuang-tz’u’s Theory of Revolutionary Literature
• 7 Ch’ien Hsing-ts’un’s Theory of Proletarian Realism and “Literature of Power”
• 8 Mao Tun’s Struggle for a Realistic and Marxist Theory of Literature
• 9 Ch’ii Ch’iu-pai’s Russian Example and the Concept of Reality in Literature and Art
• 10 Lu Hsiin’s Contribution to the History of Modern Chinese Literary Criticism and his Struggle for a United Marxist Front
• 11 Liang Shih-ch’iu and Chinese New Humanism
• 12 Feng Nai-ch’ao, Li Ch’u-li and their Leftist Theory of Art and Literature
• Epilogue
• Selected Bibliography
• Index