, History and Politics in 20th Century China - Literature review Example

Running head: Literature, Politics and History Name Xxxxx Course Xxxxx Lecturer Xxxxx Date xxxxx The relationship between literature, history and politics in 20th century China The Chinese have risen to become a force to reckon with in the 21st century and is now the second largest economy after the United States. It has the largest population in the world and presents to the global economics as the largest emerging market for various goods and services. China has not grown to these heights over night. Rather, the republic is a demonstration of a prolonged struggle characterised by internal divisions, conflicts, foreign intrusions and revolutions, all which have yielded her into the superpower she is today. Since the inception of the Chinese People’s Party rule under Mao Zedong, China has made her history through revolutions which may be marked as a continuation of the ancient Chinese dynasties. The 20th century stands out as important moments that not only shaped Chinese literary history, but also its social, political and economic components. It is in this moment that Jonathan Spence authors ‘The Gate of Heavenly Peace: The Chinese and their Revolution 1895-1980’. This book gives a narrative of this revolution through the stories of China’s intellectuals and scholars who reflect on aspects characterising the 20th century such as internal divisions, conflicts, foreign infringement and the many revolutions. There have been indications that literature, politics and history are interrelated. Interestingly, history and politics are narrated and conducted in literature. In return, both history and politics have become aestheticized by literature as the latter becomes politicized. This paper reflects on Spence’s book, which has a focus on the essayist Lu Xun, Kang Youwei, reformer and a feminist novelist Ding Ling as some of the key scholars, to establish the extent and aspects of this relationship. All the Spence’s literati are an example of how literature influences politics by aestheticizing it and how the latter impacts literature and other forms of art (Kritzman & Reilly, 2006). According to Pollack & Marrs (2001), “those who do not believe that there is a direct relationship between literature, literary criticism, politics, the writings of history and the ideological structures of our lives need only consider the virtually monolithic, hememonic control that Nashville’s fugitives and Agrarians and their progeny have exerted…” (pp. 52). There are stories and historical events that dominated the American literary criticism such as the Nashville fugitives indicating the inseparability of art and politics and history. This literature argues against the dictum that relating politics to art makes literature polemic and propaganda by indicating that literature amounts to a political act inspite of any attempts to aestheticize it. Button (2009) relates to this by pointing-out the modernity of literature which is a reflected by a tripatite association that involves literature itself, philosophy and criticism. The modernity also entrenches an institutional arrangement of the tripatite relates that is manifested in its pedagogy, literary theory and criticism. Spence describes intellectual communities who do not necessarily drive the revolution. Rather, they have repressing experiences from the revolution, further indicating another element of the exchanges in the tripatite relationship. Using their literary works, he is able to not only narrate the history of the political and social revolution of the Chinese, but also to relate to criticism against systems and the endevours of the revolutions in trying to aestheticize writers. As such, the books’ content manifests three aspects of the tripatite relationship: narration and vessel of history and political revolution, criticism, and aestheticization. 20th century literature was full of ideas of the past and its time on culture, history, politics, gender, culture, ethnicity, literature ideas and other aspects (Kritzman & Reilly, 2006). Literature carries history and is a political medium. Using Ding Ling’s works he exemplifies the history of the emancipations of the Chinese women by Ling has been described as being in pursuit of this emancipation all her life, such that at one time she joins the Communist People’s Party (CPP) and represents the republic in international meets (Alber, 2001). She is a feminist writer who later becomes sharp critique of the Party after a fall-out leading to her publishing ban in 1958. Her reacions after the death of her husband are reflected in the history of the Jacksonian democracy. White male suffrage is established bettering the democratization process and giving primacy to common man. Ling’s rise to the CPP also reflect the political history of New England when Andrew Jackson’s mass mobilization and election to the presidency is seen to embody the emancipation and ascendancy of the common man (Cheng, 2008). These examples reflect the use of literature to narrate history, which is refered to as histriography. By refering to real people such Ling and Xun, their biographies, and stories told through poetry and other forms of literature, The Gate of Heavenly Peace documents the discontinuous and rather random occurrences of the revolution into a discontinuous flow. It does it in a way that surpasses historical fiction which presents just an imaginative act that is closely related to the event. On Xun, Spence reveals his anti-communist writings, the recordings of the massacre on 18th March 1926, marriage, the critiques of Qu Quibai and contacts with Ding Ling. Qi is an impoverished pro-Confusian poet who ends up in the Soviet Union after the May Fourth rally. According to Xun, the 18th March massacre goes down as the darkest day in China when anti-imperialist student demonstrators were killed and injured at the Gate of Heavenly Peace square. He is anti-Communist and a bother to Nationalists demonstrating a critiquing attitude for both, ambiguously. However, his support is to the latter, though he uses critique as a way of strengthening Nationalistic reforms. Much as these historical writings narrate the revolution struggles, they also prominently influence the writings in return. For instance in the aftemath of the revolution, Xun writes: As for any deeper significance, I think there is very little; for this was only an unarmed demonstration. The history of mankind’s battle forward through bloodshed is like the formation of coal, where a great deal of wood is needed to produce a small amount of coal. (Schoppa, 2000, pp. 63; Spence, 1981, pp. 197) This position is reflected upon by Pollack & Marrs (2001) who argue against the dictum that literature could only take politics as a subject. The relationship is that politics and history are narrated through literature, and in turn influence what is written as a reaction. This reaction has been used to argue and instruct political situations without turning the literature into polemic or propaganda. As such, literature is a political act and consequence in spite of the endeavors to aestheticize it since it follows after, as a reaction to, or prompts decisions, historical and cultural events. This demonstrates nationalistic and ethnic identities often invoked by polital and social revolution participants and elites. As carried in literature, the political revolution of the chinese is inseparable from revolutions in the cultural and social aspects of this society. The authors cited in Spence work narrate the struggles of this society against retrogressive elements of the Conficiun system that had been deeply entreched into the society and being supported by the Confician pieties in spite of its official end in 1905. For instance, in Xun’s “A Madman’s Diary” he narrates, with literary criticism, the struggles between the Conficiun ideologies with virtue and morality on societal problems such as power distance, masculinity-feminity and marriage. He recreates the events with a performance of the cited authors’ works. According to Reinelt & Roach (2007) performances of art such as in literature execute an original of an event by creating a prescient expectation- a relationship between the reader and author in which the writings imitate life. Literature has an ability to make and/ or obliterate history and politics. The renown nationalistic scholarly reformer, Kang Youwei drafts a document to Emperor Guangxu, his uant and Empress Cixi crying for change in China’s education and economic systems. Focusing on Beijing, he presses the need to shift the capital base from it, owing to its bleak safety and expences in its defence. He relates the position of the capital in Beijing to the increasing concerns for foreign imperialism, especially Shimonoseki Treaty which was essentially benefiting the Japanese. He writes a literary critique questioning the Emperor’s move to stage the capital at Beijing and the lack of conventional army. This is a critique with an intention to strengthen the state. Essentially, Kang seeks to have a state that has institutional flexibility and personnel that would enhance the states strength. His worry is explored by Spence in his description of the Gate of Heavenly Peace. Spence writes: ….it was through this gate that the main axis of the Emperor’s power was believed to run, as he sat in his throne, facing south, the force of his presence radiating out across the courtyards and ornamental rives of the palace compound, passing through the gate, and so the gate reaches of the countryside beyond… (Spence, 1981; pp 17) The Gate manifests as a paradox :being the seat of the state’s power, yet the state’s weakest pillar owing to internal instability and corruption, as well as the threat of external threats. Kang believed in reforms within the declining empire. He presents a picture of someone who understands the chinese state from the key aspects detailed in the revolution of his latter years: economic, political and social reforms. his proposal has six reforms, but yet he indicates the failing state of the empire in addressing the deploring poverty state. By his writings, he managed to influence the Emperor who began reforms in the education, but they were forestalled by the his overthrowing. Kang was forced to life abroad where he continues to write classical poems with a focus on a ‘Great Community’. Using the writings he forms an organization to protect the emperor by which he raises funds from overseas Chinese to stage a 1900 major political uprising. He completes the “Book of Great Community” in which he envisions a strong union of nations and continues to inspire the young even after the 1911 break out of the revolution. In the opinion of this paper, his works are a show of the persistence of literature in trying to force reforms in a way that is independent, critical, thoroughly informed and individually oriented. Distinguished writers often considered their works to be part of the revolutions and many of them turned to members of the CPP. As such, the relationship between literary works and politics became so integrative that it has always been protagonistic to try to differentiate them. Of concern was the role of literature in the political and social revolution activities and how effective it would be. The latter arises even today given the endeavors to aestheticize art. However, Malmqvist & Eberstein (1990) explore two factors that may have led to the rather unanimous support of the revolution by literature at its beginning and its peak in the 1980s. Firstly, the authors had the attitude that their education was to serve the society, derived from the Conficiun ideologies of morality and loyalty. Education did not have much of professional weight, but rather a moral one. this concurs with concepts of Marxism which place prominence on consciousness by life, with the thoughts of human being rooted in human activity, and not vice-versa. As such, a revolution against foreign imperialism expressed moral duty to the society to promote emancipation from social, political and economic oppression and have an all-equal society. Secondly, the unanimity of revolutionalistic writing has been related to the urgency of China’s problems so that there was no space for differences amongst the scholars. In this narration of the political, economic and social revolution of China, Spence also demonstrates how both politics and literature become aestheticized. Contrary to previously noted arguments against aestheticization literature has overwhelming demonstrated the inseparability of political and literature aestheticization. Literature is aestheticized in parallel with the process of modernization (Gürçağlar, 2008; Pettersen, 2000). Aestheticization of politics implies that the political processes and activities are undertaken and progressed using artistic elements such as public media, literature and spectacles. Petterson (2000) further this concept on by exploring the role of literary fascism in its role to instruct and influnce the process of revolution. Literature has implicit potential to construct and fabricate a fictional world that fascist parties attempt to duplicate at the level of political, social and cultural institutions (pp. 3). Spence goes beyond this fictional level by narrating the history of the revolution from the point of view of the scholars of early revolution days who write their personal experiences. His literari and activitsts are supportive of the government, but mostly from marginal points through their critique, which they direct to strengthen the society. Totalitarian ideologists such as those of the CPP exploit the fascist tendencies in literature to aesthestice both the revolution process and the literature itself. As such, literature is also politicized, especially as the authors react to political events. For instance, Xun displays this in his reaction over the historical 18th March Massacre. In this politicization, the scholars experience vilification and acclaim moments, relative to volatility of the political atmosphere so that they are both friends and enemies of the government at different times. In essence, the literature is not meant entire to drive totalitarianism. Rather, its self-reflexive nature plays a formative role in how extremist politics are conceived and practices, relative to the mood of the revolution. There have been occassions when political battles have been fought over the content of literature with different sides of a political struggle proposing and defending some while opposing others (Kritzman & Reilly, 2006). As such, it is undeniable that the scholars influenced the literary dimension of the revolution. Hence, literature politicization and political aestheticization are inseparable. The paradox of the physical Gate of Heavenly Peace may also be reflected on using the role of literary criticism on politics and history. The two previously explored aspects of the tripatite relationship are intertwined in the characteristic literary criticism. This has been theorized as the politics of literature by which writers empower their governments or fuel political revolutions. Whereas there are critiques of the relationship between political outcomes and literary criticism works for lack of directness (Young, 1996), the writings of Spence are clear on this relationship. This may explain why Spence opts to use the activists not necessarily as the drivers of the revolution, but as actors through whom the revolution history can be narrated. In conclusion, it is undeniable that there is a relationship between literature, history and politics. Literature is a medium through which politics and history are narrated and formed. Spence’s work shows how various writers influenced the revolution and thus aestheticized the process. The Chinese intellectuals played a central role to critique or support systems by both writing to inspire action and acting. Kang’s influence is reformist in the failing empire whereas Xun’s works are anti-Communist as the strengthen Natioanalists by way of critique. In return, politics and history have influenced the way literature is written, especially as the activists react to political situations. This demonstrates the role of literary criticism which in turn has the potential to influence the politics. As such, the three have a cyclic tripatite relationship. References Alber, C. (2001). The making of a revolutionary writer : Ding Ling in Guomingdang China. Westport: Praeger. Button, P. (2009). Configurations of the real in Chinese literary and aesthetic modernity. Leiden: Brill. Cheng, E. K. (2008). The plain and noble garb of truth : nationalism & impartiality in American historical writing, 1784-1860. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Gürçağlar, S. (2008). The politics and poetics of translation in Turkey, 1923-1960. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Kritzman, L., & Reilly, B. (2006). The Columbia history of twentieth-century french thought. New York: Columbia University Press. Malmqvist, G., & Eberstein, B. (1990). A selective guide to Chinese literature, 1900-1949. Vol. 4, The drama. Leiden: Berlin. Pettersen, D. (2000). Affective Realisms: The Politics of Form in 1930s French Literature and Cinema. University of Southern California. Pollack, H., & Marrs, S. (. (2001). Eudora Welty and politics : did the writer crusade? Baton Rouge: Lousiana State University. Reinelt, J., & Roach, J. (. (2007). Critical Theory and performance. Michigan: University of Michigan. Spence, J. (1981). The Gate of Heavenly Peace. New York: Viking. Young, R. (1996). Torn halves : political conflict in literary and cultural theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Read More