Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Reviews 237 YibingHuang.Contemporary Chinese Literature: From the Cultural Revolution to the Future. NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2007.x,219pp. $90.00,isbn13:978-1-4039-7982-7;isbn10:1-4039-7982-0. Contemporary Chinese Literature: From the Cultural Revolution to the Futureputs forthaninsightfulandoriginalapproachtothestudyofcontemporaryChinese literature,butisatthesametimemarredwithaglaringtheoreticallapseonitskey operativeconcept:bastard.Thisword,andattimestheterm"culturalbastards,"is usedtocharacterizethosecontemporaryChinesewriterswhohavelivedthrough theMaoera--agroupthatbasicallyincludesthemajorityofChinesewriters whoseworksrepresentthecorpusofwhatisrecognizedascontemporaryChinese literature.Tousesuchaprovocativewordcertainlycanattractattention.However, withoutsufficientlyelaboratingonhowthisword-as-conceptcameaboutinthe contextofmodern/contemporaryChineseliteratureandculture,andwithout teasingoutthemanyimplicationsandconfusionsinherentintheworditself, YibingHuangalsomakesitexceedinglydifficultforthisreadertoovercomethe naggingskepticismwhenevertheauthorevokes"bastards"or"culturalbastards" to discussthegenerationthatsurvivedtheMaoera:CuiJian(b.1961),DuoDuo (b.1951),WangShuo(b.1958),ZhangChengzhi(b.1948),WangXiaobo (b. 1952)--theartistandwritersthatHuangdiscussesindepthinthisbook.To giveamorecomprehensiveview,thelistincludesBeiDao(b.1949),ZhangYimou (b.1951),CanXue(b.1953),HanShaogong(b.1953),GuCheng(b.1956),MoYan (b.1956),YuHua(b.1960),SuTong(b.1963),GeFei(b.1964),andsoon. Incallingthesewritersandartists"bastards"or"culturalbastards,"Huangis atonceclaimingthemtobeillegitimate,false,spurious,counterfeit,andhybrid. Withoutgettingintothemeaningsofeachofthesewordsandtheirpossible implications(andcomplications),weonlyneedtopointouttheirantonymsto immediatelyputHuang'soperativeconceptinjeopardy:legitimate,true,genuine, authentic,andoriginal.Hence,wemustaskthisquestion:Whatqualifiesaslegitimate,true,genuine,authentic,andoriginalcultureorliterature?Or,toputit bluntly,isitevenpossibletodefinesuchacultureorliteraturewithoutfallingback onracialfundamentalismandextremenationalism?Huang,however,seemsto implythatChinesecultureonlybegantobastardizesincethenineteenthcentury asWesternthoughtsandproductsfloodedintoChinaandeventuallyculminated intheMayFourthsociocultural-politicalmovement.Huangcontendsthatthe "newman"whowasconceptualizedbyintellectualstobefreeoftheburdenofthe pastwasinactuality"nothinglessthanan`orphanofhistory'asopposedtoone withacontaminated,impureandillegitimateorigin,thatis,adamned`cultural bastard'"(p.2).TakingLuXun's"AMadman'sDiary"ashisspringboard,Huang continuestoarguethat"thisMadman,theveryfirst`newman'ofmodernChinese literature,suffersfromthediscoveryofhisownrootednessinandcontamination © 2011 by University of Hawai`i Press 238 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.17,No.2,2010 byapremodernhistory."(p.2)Meanwhile,almostsimultaneouswiththepublicationof"AMadman'sDiary,"MaoZedonghaddevelopedhisownvisionofthe Chinesesubject,which"wasaresultofahybridizationofthetraditionalConfucianismwiththenewlyimportedGermanidealismandnationalism"(p.3).This madmanturnednewmanturnedorphanofhistoryturnedbastardprocess,as Huangconcludes,replayeditselfinthepostCulturalRevolutioneraafterMao's nearlythreedecadesofnationalizingtheChinesesubjecttocreatea"Maoist`new man'"(p.4). Huang'sapplicationoftheword"bastard"thusseemstobemoreofadescriptivefunctionthantooperateasatheoreticalconceptbyanymeasure.Regardless ofhisintendedusage,words,however,doconveyunintendedmeaningstoreaders. InherentinthislineofargumentisthesuggestionthatChinesecultureasawhole wasoncepureandunhybridizedbecausetheso-called(cultural)bastardsobviouslydidnotexistbeforetheMayFourthMovement,oratleastHuangmentions none.Takingthebookasawhole,theideaofbastardorculturalbastardreallyhas lesstheoreticalsignificationthanmerelyapoeticlicensethattheauthorextends toofar.CallingMao'schildren"bastards"isradicalandshockingenough,butto useitasarecurringmotifwithlessthanconvincingconnotationinaseriousand scholarlyworkinevitablymustmaketheentireprojectproblematic.Asidefrom thisconceptualshortcoming,however,therestofthebookisactuallyquiteworth reading. Huang'smainthesisistoarguethatthelegacyoftheCulturalRevolutionhas a muchmoreprofoundimpactoncontemporaryChineseliteraturethanliterary scholarshaverecognized.Huangarguesthat"[theCulturalRevolution]andits legacyhavemarkedcontemporaryChineseliteraturewithnotjustascar,butwith abrandofbastardy"(p.5).BylinkingtheCulturalRevolutionwithcontemporary Chineseliterature,HuangchallengestheestablishednotionthattakestheMaoera, andespeciallytheCulturalRevolution,asarupturesegregatingMayFourth literatureandpost-Maocontemporaryliterature--twoliteraryperiodsthatseem tobearmuchculturalandliteraryparallelism,asmostliteraryscholarshave argued.InspiredbyrecentscholarshipestablishingthetiebetweenthelateQing literatureandtheMayFourthliterature,Huangattemptstobringbackthelegacy oftheCulturalRevolutioninthediscussionofcontemporaryChineseliterature.It isundeniablethatmostcontemporaryChinesewriterswhohavelivedthroughthe MaoerashareapreoccupationwiththeMaoistinheritanceandhavebeendeeply markedbythevariouspoliticalcampaignssuchastheAnti-RightistMovement, theGreatLeapForwardandtheGreatLeapFamine,andtheCulturalRevolution. EvenintheworksofYuHua,SuTong,andGeFei--whowereonlychildren duringthetenyearsoftheCulturalRevolution--theindelibleimpactofthe CulturalRevolutionisseenthroughout.Byestablishingthiscorrelation,modern Chineseliterarydiscoursethusisseenasalongandcontinuousdevelopment Reviews 239 characterizedbysocioculturalandpoliticalchangesindifferenthistorical moments. ToreinstitutetheCulturalRevolutionincontemporaryChineseliterature, HuangexaminestheBildungsromanofeachofhisstudiedwritersduringthe CulturalRevolutionperiod,beittheexperienceoftheRedGuardmovement,the rusticreeducationmovement(shangshan xiaxiang,"goingtothemountains, sendingdowntothevillages"),orasarebelliousschoolkidspendingmuchtime wonderingthestreets.InadditiontothesetypicalCulturalRevolutionexperiences,anothersignificantfactorthatshapedmanyoftheyouthatthattimewas theundergroundliteratureandcultureofdecadence,skepticism,andcynicism thatrancountertotherevolutionaryzealandenthusiasmoftheday(p.32).The earlypoetryofDuoDuo,aprincipalproponentandcontributortotheMisty SchoolofcontemporaryChinesepoetry,exemplifiesanalternativesubjectformationprocessnurturedpreciselybytheundergroundliteratureandculture.Wang Shuo'shooliganwritings,anotherhallmarkofcontemporaryChineseliterary creativity,wereamajorliteraryforceinthe1990s.Hisbrandofhooliganismalso gavehisfictionexceptionalsalabilityinChina'snewmarketeconomy.Butinstead ofagreeingwithcriticslikeJingWang,whoviewstheWangShuophenomenonas somethinguniqueofthe1990s,Huangarguesthereis,infact,adialecticrelationshipbetweenMao'sRedGuardsandWangShuo'shooligans,asbotharerebelsand self-proclaimedmastersoftheday:"[T]heMaoistmastermentalityoftheCultural Revolutionisnowsearchingforafreshstartinanewgenerationof`heroes.'The hooligansor`riffraff 'onceagainshallclaimtheir`vanguard'legitimacyinanew hybridworldofsocialist-capitalism"(pp.7071).Bybringingbackhistorical perspectivetotheburgeoningheteroglossiaoftheliterarysceneofthe1990s insteadofbeingmesmerizedbyChina'sunprecedentedmarketeconomy,Huang convincinglyarguesthatthebankruptcyofrevolutionaryutopianismoftheCulturalRevolutionwasreplacedbythenewidealismofthereformera.WangShuo's hooligansarebutMao'sRedGuardsreincarnated. ContrarytoWangShuo'scynicalplayfulnesstowardtheCulturalRevolution legacy--asentimentsharedbymanyofhiscontemporarywritersandartists-- ZhangChengzhistandsoutinthismixasasteadfastdefenderofthepastrevolutionaryera.Interestingly,HuangarguesthatZhangChengzhi'srelentlessdefense oftheCulturalRevolutionvis-à-vishisaestheticismisactuallymotivatedby"an unspokenguiltcomplex...toseekanaestheticredemptionandalternativeunderstanding,soastoseparatetheRedGuardasanembodimentofindividualidealism andromanticismfromtheRedGuardasacollectivehistoricalmovement(evenif short-lived)witharecordofviolenceandterror"(p.111).Thequestionofguiltis hardlytalkedaboutwhenitcomestotheatrocitiesthatoccurredduringtheMao years.Withoutexception,boththewriter'sstubbornpursuitoftheunrealized potentialsoftherevolutionarydream(ZhangChengzhi's)andthecritic'sfocused 240 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.17,No.2,2010 discussionofthewriter'ssearchforanewnationalsubjectvis-à-visaHegelian "lyricaltotality"(Huang's)skillfullycircumventtheissueofincrediblehumancost andmassiveinjusticeincurredinthenameofrevolution(p.135). ThelastculturalbastarddiscussedinthisbookisWangXiaobo,whosefiction inthe1990soffersarefreshingandinspiringperspectivetotheunderstandingof theCulturalRevolution.WangXiaobounabashedlyexploresthemostprivateand attimesbizarrehumanemotionsandbehaviorsundertheshiningbeamsofthe bigredsun.Althoughhistory,orthehistoryoftheCulturalRevolution,isvery muchWangXiaobo'spreoccupationinhisfiction,inevitablyhemustreconcileit withtheindividual'sinabilitytotranscendhistoryand,hence,thetyrannyof revolutionagainsttheindividual.AsHuangconcludeshisanalysis,"WangXiaobo, afterall,showshimselftobeoneofthefewcontemporaryChinesewriterswho haveconstantlysuspected--andwithgoodreason--thevirtualnatureofthe individualinhistory,whichoftenhasbeentakenbyothersasapositivereality beyondanydoubt"(p.179).Historyasagrandnotionis,infact,nothingmore thananemptysignifierusedtodisguisethebittertruththatChineseindividuals arebutdispensablepawnsinMao'sgreatdreamofproletarianrevolution. Inhisepilogue,HuangwarnsofthedangerofunderminingorevendismissingtheimpactoftheCulturalRevolutiononcontemporaryChineseliterature, particularlywhenencounteringcertainworksthatdonotfitneatlyinanykindof categoryorlinearviewofliterarydevelopment.Theseworksmaybevoicesthat attempttospeakthroughthesilencesurroundingthelegacyoftheCulturalRevolution(p.188).Inclosing,HuangalsoremindshisreadersthattheCulturalRevolutiondoesnotrepresentanabruptbreakinthelongcourseofChina'sstrivefor modernity,but,instead,theCulturalRevolutionisverymuchapartofthisgrand project. LingchieLettyChen Lingchei Letty Chen is an associate professor of modern Chinese literature at Washington University, specializing in cultural identity politics and cross-cultural studies. © 2011 by
China Review International – University of Hawai'I Press
Published: Mar 1, 2010
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.