by Tam King-fai
essayists had taken root in the popular imagination.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Introduction 11
broader and more neutral term, sanwen, is sometimes used, if only
because the term enables one to avoid getting into the kind of
controversies that have come to plague other terms. Up to this day, for
example, collections of essays are mostly published under titles that
clearly display the term sanwen ZIPMZ PIV WPMZ[ _QP UWZM [XMKQÅK
references. On the literal level, sanwen is equivalent to the English word ¹XZW[Mº IVL Q[ [MMV QV WXXW[QQWV W yunwen (verse). In this sense, it encompasses anything that is not marked by a prominent use of rhythm
and rhyme.
While it is no doubt correct to name a piece of xiaopin wen as a
work of sanwen, there are many other forms of writing in the vast
territory of sanwenPILWVWKWVNWZUWPM[XMKQÅKKPIZIKMZQ[QK[WN
xiaopin wen. Therefore, in skirting controversy, critics who use the term sanwen have made little contribution to the understanding of xiaopin wen per se. Moreover, the two different but overlapping denotations of the term create another problem. On the one hand, it can be used as
a complement to yunwen to divide all writing into two categories. On
PM WPMZ PIVL Q IT[W LM[QOVIM[ I VIZZW_MZ OMVZM WN VWVÅKQWVIT
prose, more or less equivalent to essays, and as such, allows the domain
WN TQMZI]ZM W JM LQ^QLML QVW NW]Z KIMOWZQM[" ÅKQWV LZIUI XWMZa
IVL VWVÅKQWVIT XZW[M
conceptions of sanwen. In their theoretical discussions, they have tended to use the term sanwen in a broad sense to include all forms of prose.
Yet, when they deal with particular pieces of work, they have tended for
the most part to come up with examples that belong to narrower genres
of prose, such as xiaopin wen.
The introduction of the term sanwen into our discussion of names
UISM[ Q VMKM[[IZa NWZ ][ W ISM I ÅVIT TWWS I PM XTIKM PM UWLMZV
+PQVM[MM[[IaWKK]XQM[QVPMTIZOMZ[KPMUMWN KTI[[QÅKIQWVWN _ZQQVO
if only because knowing where it stands relative to other forms of
literature will give us a better idea of how it works. Besides, as critics
have struggled to square their new understanding of xiaopin wen with
the tripartite division of literature into fiction, poetry, and drama,
a categorization that came from the West, they have also been fond
of pointing out the illogicalities and inconsistencies of traditional
classifications by people such as Yao Nai, Zeng Guofan, and Chen
Tianding. The preceding discussion of the changing domain of sanwen,
for example, can yield two different trees:
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
12
A Garden of One’s Own
1. Narrow conception of the term sanwen
Poetry
Drama
Fiction
Sanwen
6WVÅKQWVITXZW[M" Xiaopin wen
7PMZNWZU[WN VWVÅKQWVITXZW[M
2. Broad conception of the term sanwen
Sanwen
(Prose):
Drama
Fiction
6WVÅKQWVITXZW[M"
Xiaopin wen
7PMZNWZU[WN VWVÅKQWVITXZW[M
Poetry
These various ways of categorizing literature10 have combined to
sketch a landscape of writing against which I will attempt to position
xiaopin wen. Rather than coming up with another diagram which is at
best cumbersome in representing cross-generic forms such as poetic
drama and prose poems, I will lay out below a set of questions that
critics cannot avoid asking, if only implicitly, when they are asked to
decide whether a piece of work is a xiaopin wen or not.
1. Is the work in question a work of prose or poetry?
1N QQ[I_WZSWN XZW[MQ[QÅKQWVITWZVWVÅKQWVIT'
3. If it is non-fictional,11 is it creative prose, as opposed to
argumentative or analytical prose?
4. Finally, if it is creative, is it personal, meditative prose about
everyday experiences, rather than topical and discursive prose of
a political and social nature?
If the above four questions seem schematic, they will serve for
10
1 ÅVL PM NWTTW_QVO I\MUX[ XIZQK]TIZTa ][MN]T" ;PM ;P][MV ! BPMVO
Mingli (1987), Wang Bin (1988), and Li Ning (1990). Each of these has in turn
KWV[QLMZMLMIZTQMZKTI[[QÅKIQWV[
11
This does not mean that everything in a xiaopin wen is to be taken as literal truth. In fact, as Charles Laughlin points out, essayists often create dreamscapes
PI PI^M VW JI[Q[ QV ^MZQÅIJTM ZMITQa KPIXMZ 1V I [QUQTIZ _Ia
segments of novels are often read as short essays. What is at issue here is the
[QU]TIML KWVM` QV _PQKP PM M[[Ia Q[ ZMIL -^MV QN PM M[[Ia Q[ ÅKQWVIT PM
ZMILMZ IXXZWIKPM[ Q I[ QN Q _MZM VW 8TMI[M [MM PM [MKQWV MVQTML ¹
-[[Ia[ºQVPQ[1VZWL]KQWV
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Introduction 13
now the purpose of leading one, by the process of elimination, to a
preliminary understanding of what xiaopin wen is.
Disputes
?PI1UMIVJa¹)/IZLMVWN 7VM¼[7_VºQ[^MZaÆM`QJTMQV[KWXMIVLQ[Ja
no means restricted to any particular kind of cultivation. It does not matter what a person chooses to grow in it—it could be fruit, vegetables, medicinal herbs, roses, or dandelions. As long as he consciously devotes himself to cultivating the IZMI PI PM PI[ LM[QOVIML NWZ PQU[MTN JM Q JQO WZ [UITT PM PI[ N]TÅTTML PQ[
god-given responsibility.
Zhou Zuoren (1923, 6)
Among Chinese writers, the year 1934 was known as the Year of Xiaopin
Wen ( xiaopin wen nian) . 1Q[]VKTMIZ_PWÅZ[KIUM]X_QPPMVIUMJ]
in retrospect, the launching in that year of Lin Yutang’s Renjianshi ( This Human World), a journal devoted to the publication of xiaopin wen, played a major role in popularizing it. From the very beginning, this designation
provoked all sorts of reactions from members of various literary circles,
ranging from congratulatory applause to sarcastic jeering. The debates
over xiaopin wen rose to a new level of intensity as a result.
One has to remember that, with the gradual acceptance of the
term xiaopin wen in the late 1920s and early 1930s, the disputes among critics had by no means abated. For one thing, while most agreed that
modern xiaopin wen bore remarkable resemblances to essays of the late Ming, arguments still arose as to the precise nature of the similarity:
iconoclasm in the face of tradition, or timidity in the face of challenges
of the contemporary world? Courageous exploration of the self or
_QTTN]T VMOTMK WN PM OZMIMZ KWTTMKQ^M' )V IJQTQa W [MM ¹PM _WZTL QV
I OZIQV WN [IVLº WZ QVL]TOMVKM QV UMZMTa OIbQVO I PM [IVL XIZQKTM
itself ? The answers one gave to these questions determined whether one
was a supporter or detractor of xiaopin wen. Secondly, again depending on their answers, different critics might have different notions of what
constituted the canons of xiaopin wen. For example,
should topical
essays ( zawen),12 for which Lu Xun and other writers were famous, be considered as xiaopin wen? Or, should the term be reserved for works that 12
See Scoggin (1997) for a detailed study of zawen.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
14
A Garden of One’s Own
kept a respectful distance from discussion of social and political issues?
Framing this particular debate is of course the larger issue of what
function literature should perform in a changing society. One might add
that this question is by no means settled even today, though the terms
of discussion have changed somewhat.13 A third factor ensuring that the
debate would continue was that, even among supporters of xiaopin wen,
questions arose as to what constituted the xiaopin wen tradition. As Zhou Zuoren began his project to rewrite the history of modern Chinese
literature, identifying late Ming literature as its immediate precursor,
other friendly and unfriendly critics joined in the argument, in turn
provoking further thoughts about xiaopin wen.
One might begin discussion of the debates over xiaopin wen with a
comparison of Lu Xun (born Zhou Shuren) and Zhou Zuoren, the two
brothers who stood opposite one another on a diverse number of issues
in modern Chinese literature.14 Of the two, Lu Xun was a tireless social
OILÆa I NMIZTM[[ ^WQKM IOIQV[ QVR][QKM IVL IV QKWV WN PM +PQVM[M
revolution. His writings are unsentimental and uncompromising, with
a somewhat strained style conveying a vision that does not seem to be
articulable in any other way. Zhou Zuoren, on the other hand, projected
the image of a cultivated recluse, seemingly uncommitted to any cause
but in reality uncertain of his role at a time of great political and
cultural change. He shied away from the kind of acerbic debates that
invigorated Lu Xun, and was content to be left alone to pursue his private
QVMZM[[ WZ QV PQ[ _WZL[ W K]TQ^IM ¹I OIZLMV WN PQ[ W_Vº 0Q[ _ZQQVO
is typically serene and aloof. Unlike his brother, who has been hailed as a
national hero, Zhou Zuoren was condemned as a traitor during and after
World War II and actually served a sentence for treason.
13
Fan Songpei (1993), for example, duly notes the many schools (which he calls
tributaries) of essay writing at this time. Yet, he considers the one stream
ZMXZM[MVML Ja 4] @]V I[ PM ¹UIQV K]ZZMVº zhu chao), and gives the others, _PW LMZIK NZWU 4] @]V []KP VIUM[ I[ ¹U]IQWVº ¹KW]VMZK]ZZMVº IVL
¹JI[[º
14
Comparing the Zhou brothers was a favorite exercise among intellectuals
until the 1940s, according to Li Jingbin (1987). After that, with Zhou Zuoren
becoming a practical non-person due to his collaboration with the Japanese,
the comparison practically stopped. That Lu Xun and Zhou Zuoren represent
two different interpretations of xiaopin wen has also been frequently commented upon. See, for example, Sun Xizhen (1935), Yu Dafu (1935), and Zhou Muzhai
(1935).
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Introduction 15
Differences in temperament between the two brothers may to some
degree account for the fact that they seldom saw eye to eye. Perhaps
Zhou Zuoren’s reclusive nature, coupled with his aversion to politics, had
led him to seek out kindred spirits in the Ming dynasty. In his postscript
to Yu Pingbo’s Zaban’er (1928, 314) , PM [XMIS[ WN PM ¹^Q^IKQaº WN TIM
Ming art and literature, especially that of the Gongan and Jingling
schools:
People of the Gongan school managed to ignore the orthodoxy of classical
prose, and proceeded to write with an expressive attitude. Although later
KZQQK[KWVLMUVMLPMQZ_ZQQVO[I[[]XMZÅKQITPMa_MZMQVNIKM`XZM[[QWV[
of the authentic self. Their achievement is higher than that of the Jingling
school. Scholars in the past had a dual approach to writing, but those of
the Gongan had a single approach. On this score, they are the same as
modern writers....
literature both as a way to convey the dao ( zaidao) and as a means of diversion ( xiaoqian). Here, in a very rudimentary form, is Zhou’s theory of the origins of modern literature, which he would flesh out and
modify in 1932. For the time being, however, we will focus only on his
assertion that modern essays and late Ming essays are alike in combining
the didactic and diversional functions into one.
To Lu Xun, such an analysis smacked of wishful thinking,
suggesting that Zhou Zuoren simply wanted, as if it were, to have his
cake and eat it too; he wanted to be given the freedom to engage in
an enjoyable diversion through literature, but, at the same time, to be
recognized for having performed some good through his writings. (Note
that by 1932, Zhou would emerge from this ambiguity and speak more
KWVÅLMVTa VW WVTa WN PM M`Q[MVKM WN J] PM VMML NWZ I SQVL WN
literature that is non-didactic in nature.) Lu Xun’s own view was that,
if it were appropriate to speak of literature as having two functions, then
the Ming essayists were far from being able to combine the two. One
could, in fact, separate writers with a didactic and diversional bent from
one another, and that was true not only in the Ming but in the Tang, as
well:
Poetry declined at the end of the Tang, and xiaopin wen exuded brilliance.
*]4]WAQV¼[¹7V;TIVLMZºQ[ITUW[N]TTWN _WZL[WN ZMJMTTQWVIVLIVOMZ
Pi Rixiu and Lu Guimeng styled themselves as recluses, and were regarded
by others as such, but take a look at the xiaopin wen in their Pizi wen shu and This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
16
A Garden of One’s Own
Lize cong shu, and you will see that they had not forgotten the affairs of the world.... Xiaopin wen at the end of Ming was a bit disengaged from social KWVKMZV[ J] Q LQL VW LMIT M`KT][Q^MTa _QP QV[QOVQÅKIV WXQK[ WN PM
_QVL IVL PM UWWV IVL WVM KIV ÅVL QV Q ^WQKM[ IOIQV[ QVR][QKM [IQZM
criticism, and destruction.
(1933,
70)
Here, Lu Xun is not speaking against xiaopin wen as much as those who, out of self-interest, deliberately present a distorted picture of the
Chinese literary past. On his own, Lu Xun (1935) even raised a few
works of traditional Chinese literature as examples of xiaopin wen, but as far as the Gongan and Jingling schools are concerned, he did not have a
single favorable word to say.
The most damning remark that Lu Xun (1933, 67–70) made about
Zhou Zuoren’s kind of xiaopin wen Q[ PI Q _I[ I UMZM ¹SVQKSSVIKSº
( xiao baishe). As a thing of the past, it had no relevance at all to the contemporary world. Although it had a charm of its own,
at a time when wind and sand keep pelting against our faces, when wolves
and tigers gather in droves, who has the leisure to appreciate the beauty
of [such things as] amber pendants dangling from paper fans, and jade
ZQVO[' 1N _M VMMLML JMI]a I ITT _
M¼L XZMNMZ MVWZUW][ MLQÅKM[ PI ZQ[M
in the desert. We’d want something big and strong; it does not have to be
very delicate. If we needed something to give us satisfaction, we’d prefer a
dagger or a pistol. We’d want something that is sharp and practical; it does
VWPI^MWJM^MZaZMÅVML
Lu Xun’s rhetoric escalates and continues in a similar vein until, at
the end, he compares people such as Zhou Zuoren to aging prostitutes
in Shanghai. The former had to pander the old wares of late Ming
essayists when their own stock was losing currency, just as the latter,
ÅVLQVO PI PMQZ LMKTQVQVO JMI]a VW TWVOMZ I\ZIKML KTQMV[ QN PMa
remained in their own quarters, now plastered heavy makeup on their
faces and began to walk the streets.
The uncharitable analogy to knickknacks and, to a lesser extent,
to prostitutes, began to catch on,15 thanks most probably to its outright
viciousness, and late Ming essays and their alleged modern echoes were
assigned the same status as objects that served merely a decorative
purpose. As for the promoters of the Gongan and Jingling schools, they
15
See, for example, Mao Dun (1934a, 1934b) and Zhou Muzhai (1935).
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:23:15 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Introduction 17
were seen to lead, unwittingly or otherwise, to a life out of touch with
reality. The caricature of the man of leisure that opened our discussion
sets up effectively the contrast between the warmth and peacefulness of
his inner sanctum and the inclement weather outside. Only the most
QV[MV[QQ^M KW]TL JM [IQ[ÅML _QP PM KWKWWVML TQNM PM UIV Q[ TMILQVO
;QOVQÅKIVTaPMPMUMWN ¹SVQKSSVIKS[ºZMUIQV[XZWUQVMV\PZW]OPW]
the caricature, as Qian Gechuan goes one by one through his description
of the painting, calligraphy, incense burner, potted plants, snuffbox, and,
ÅVITTaKWTTMKQWVWN 5QVOM[[Ia[XQKSMLIZIVLWUNZWUPM[PMTN
It is clear that the focus of the debate had now shifted.
Disagreements continued as to what constituted a genuine piece of
xiaopin wen, but critics were now more concerned with what kind of
writing China needed at this particular juncture in history. In the
