"The Left L e a g u e Decade":
L e f t - w i n g L i t e r a r y M o v e m e n t in Shanghai, 1 9 2 7 - 1 9 3 6
Ph.D. Thesis s u b m i t t e d
by
W A N G - C H I W O N G 1 9 8 6
Sch o o l of O r i e n t a l and A f r i c a n S t udies U n i v e r s i t y of London
ProQuest N um ber: 10731545
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The q u a lity of this re p ro d u c tio n is d e p e n d e n t u p o n the q u a lity of the c o p y s u b m itte d . In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u th o r did not send a c o m p le te m a n u scrip t and there are missing p a g e s , these will be n o te d . Also, if m a te ria l had to be re m o v e d ,
a n o te will in d ic a te the d e le tio n .
P roQ uest 10731545
Published by ProQuest LLC (2017). C o p y rig h t of the Dissertation is held by the A uthor.
All rights reserved.
This work is p ro te c te d a g a in s t u n a u th o riz e d c o p y in g under Title 17, United States C o d e M icro fo rm Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
A B S T R A C T
The coup d'etat of Jiang Jieshi in 1 927 brought a sudden end to the first united front between the KMT and the CCP. From then on, the Commu n i s t Party was driven u n d e r g r o u n d and su r v i v e d only with great diffi c u l t i e s , until the second unit e d front was formed in 1937* Tet w i t h i n the same period, we-.saw the e m e r g e n c e and growth of c o n c e r t e d l e f t - w i n g a c t i v i t y in the l i t e r a r y arena.
The present thesis is an at t e m p t to look into the b a c k ground, the d e v e l o p m e n t as well as the o u t c o m e of this movement, with s p ecial r e f e r e n c e to the Chi n e s e League of L e f t - w i n g Writers, an o r g a n i z a t i o n formed in 1930 under the d i r e c t i o n and control of the CCP. It covers the period known as "The Left League Decade" in m o d e r n Chinese l i t erary hibtory.
The thesis is in three parts. Part one d i s c u s s e s the p re - L e a g u e period, the years before the f o r m a t i o n of the League. It deals mai n l y with the r e v o l u t i o n a r y 1 iterary m o v e m e n t in 1 927-28, which in fact c o n s i s t e d of a p olemic b e t w e e n the u ltra-left, the left and the right over the issue of r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. The steps taken for the f o r m a t i o n of the united front a m o n g the left after this heated debate are analyzed. Part two, which c o m p r i s e s four chapters, is on the Lea g u e itself.
The first is a g e n e r a l survey of the formation, m e m b e r s h i p and s t r u c t u r e of the or g a n i z a t i o n . The second and third chapters di s c u s s the a c h i e v e m e n t s of the League in the first half of its existence. The League then began to dec l i n e from 19 3-4 onwards. The internal c o n f l i c t s which finally led to the a l i e n a t i o n of its chief leader and the
"giant" of m o d e r n Chinese literature, Lu Xun, are p r e s e n t ed in great detail in the last chapter of part two. Part three traces and gives an ac c o u n t of the d i s s o l u t i o n of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and the s u b s e q u e n t Two Slo g a n Polemic in
3
1 936 over the action to be taken in the new political situation. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the po l e m i c and the d e v e l o p m e n t s in po l i t i c s takes up a c o n s i d e r a b l e portion of the. discussion.- Before c l o s i n g the tihesis, an, epilo g u e is at t a c h e d which looks at the Left League and the left wing liter a r y m o v e m e n t of the thirties in their h i s t o r i c a l context. It also includes a review of their a p p r a i s a l in the m a i n l a n d after the e-stablishment of the People's Repub l i c of China in 1949.
T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S
A B S T R A C T ... ''... 2 A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T ... 5 I N T R O D U C T I O N ... 6 CHAPTER
1. The P r e - L e a g u e period: Debate on 13 r e v o l u t i o n a r y lite r a t u r e (1927-1929)
2. Towards the road of a united front
( 1 929- 1 930 ) ... - ... 71 3. The Left League: Its formation,
m e m b e r s h i p and s t r u c t u r e ... 111 4. Years of a c h ievement: The first half
of the Left League ( 1 930- 1 933 ) (I) . 164 5. Years of achiev e m e n t : The first half
of the Left League (1930-1933) (II) 221 6. The w a n i n g years: The second half of
the Left League ( 1 934- 1 935 ) ... 282 7. D i s s o lu t i o n and polemic (1935-1936) 330 C O N C L U S I O N ... 397 G L O S S A R Y ... .... ... 417 APPENDIX: M e m b e r s h i p list of the C hinese 434
League of L e f t - w i n g Writers
B I B L I O G R A P H Y ... 438
5
A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
In the p r ocess of w r i t i n g this thesis, I r e c eived help in one way or ano t h e r from so many people that it is i m p o s s i b l e to a c k n o w l e d g e them all.
I am p a r t i c u l a r l y g r a t e f u l to P r o f e s s o r David E.
Pollard, my s u p e r v i s o r in the School of Or i e n t a l and African Studies, U n i v e r s i t y of London. W i t h o u t his guidance, advice and a s sistance, the pr e s e n t study could not have been a c c o m p l i s h e d . His v a l u a b l e comments and s u g g e st i o n s c o r r e c t e d many of my m i stakes. I am also h e a v i l y indebted to Mr Nigel B e dford and Dr Gr egory B. Lee who have read the manusc r i p t , p r o v i d i n g i l l u m i n a t i n g s u g g e s t i o n s and saving me from many errors in my English. Needl e s s to say, I alone am r e s p o n s i b l e for any m i s t a k e s that remain.
Spe c i a l thanks should be e x t e n d e d to, among others, Mrs Mary M.Y. Fung, P r o f e s s o r L.Y. Chiu, Dr P.L. Chan, Dr. S.K. Wong, my teachers in the Department of Chinese, U n i v e r s i t y of Hong Kong, for their i n c e s s a n t e n c o u r a g e m e n t in the process of writing. I must also thank my several s c h o o l m a t e s in the University, Dr. K.P. Ho, Messrs. S.S. Yung (now in Princeton), K.K. Luke (York), C.K. Chan (San Diego) W.O. Yeung and K.K. Chan for their immense help and in
terests.
For fina n c i a l support I wish to thank the A s s o c i a t i o n of C o m m o n w e a l t h U n i v e r s i t i e s for the Commonwealth- S c h o l a r s h i p which enabled me to do resea r c h in London, as well as the Central Research Fund of the U n i v e r s i t y of London.
Lastly, I wish to thank my family and in pa r t i c u l a r my wife, Anita, who has shared with me the ha r d s h i p s of a s t u d e n t ' s life, and my two sons, Clarence and Terence, who have always been able to cheer me up at times of frustration.
I N T R O D U C T I O N
1927 was one of the most impor t a n t years in modern Chinese history, e sp e c i a l l y in the histo'ry of the Chinese C o mmunist Party ( ffi pi ^ Jj| , often a b b r e vi a t e d as the CCP). It mar k e d the end of the first united front b e tween the Party and the KMT (Pi ^ ^ , Kuomintang, the Nationalist Party). At its f o r m a t i o n i’n 1921, the y o u n g Commu n i s t Party, c o m p r i s e d of a few dozen i n t e l l e c t u a l s with no e x p e r i e n c e in politics, stood no chance to fight against the two evils of China, f e u d a l i s m and i m p e rialism.
C o l l a b o r a t i o n with the b o u r g e o i s party, the KMT, seemed to be a n a tural and a c c e p t a b l e outcome, as its large m e m b e r s h i p constituted the s t r o n g e s t force in revolution, and the bo u r g e o i s i e , after all, was the only class then
[ 11
fully aware of r e v o l u t i o n a r y ideas. The Communist I n t e r n a t i o n a l in Moscow, to which the CCP turned for guidance, had also been in favour of the idea of united front. As early as September, 1921, M a r i n g (H. Sneevliet), the s e c r e t a r y of the N a t ional and Colonial C o m m i t t e e of the Comintern, met Dr Sun Y a t-sen , 1 866- 1 925 ) at Guilin, and it was repor t e d that M a r i n g pr o p o s e d a
[2]
c o l l a b o r a t i o n with the KMT. Though the plan failed, Dr Sun was i m p r e s s e d by the New E c o nomic Policy of the Soviet Union. KMT d e l e g a t e s were sent to att e n d the Congress of the Toilers of the East (also known as the Eas t e r n People's Congress) in M o s c o w in January, 1922.
In the Congress, the Soviet delegate, Safarov, boosted the KMT and a d m i t t e d that "in colonial and s e m i - c o l o n i a l countries, the first phase of the r e v o l u t i o n a r y m o v e m e n t must i n e v i t a b l y be a n a t i o n a l - d e m o c r a t i c movement". m The first united front was finally re a l i z e d in 1923 when the KMT was r e - o r g a n i z e d and took in C o m m u n i s t members.
D uring the first collabor a t i o n , the C o mmunist Party grew rapidly. With only f i f t y -s e v e n m e m b e r s at the
First Congr e s s in 1921, the m e m b e r s h i p in 1927 was 57,693, plus 35,000 m e m b e r s of the Youth Corps. [4] But this did not imply that the c o l l a b o r a t i o n was smo o t h and stable.
After the death of Sun Ya t - s e n on 12th, March, 1 925, the ho s t i l e fe e l i n g s of many KMT m e m b e r s towards the C o m m u n ists became apparent. Liao Z h o n g k a i ( 0 ft* ill , 1 877-1 925), the Finance M i n i s t e r and an ardent s u p p o r t e r of the united front, was assassina.ted in August. In November, about ten i m p o r t a n t KMT m e m b e r s met in B e i j i n g and formed a group w h ich was later known as the W e s t e r n Hill Group ( I§ LU IS )• They d e m a n d e d the i m mediate e x p u l s i o n of the C o mmunists. S e veral mon t h s later, there was the March 20th Incident, or the Gun b o a t Z h o n g s h a n Incident ( cfa [JLj Iff
$* ) in Guangzhou. Jiang Jieshi ( j{3$ ^ -H * 1 887-1 975 ) c l aimed that the C o m m u n i s t - o f f i c e r e d g u n b o a t planned to
r 5 ]
k i d n a p him, and so he d e c l a r e d m a r t i a l law. Altho u g h the incident did not lead to any serious hos t i l i t i e s , it became a p p a r e n t that Jiang Jieshi . was not a reliable ally. Then in the early m o r n i n g of 12th April, 1 927, Jiang s t a g e d ’ a coup d'etat a g ainst the C o m m u n i s t s in Shanghai. Large nu m b e r s of C o m m u n i s t s were a r r e s t e d and shot. Sim i l a r act i o n s were taken in other parts of the country. On 18th April, a new n a t i o n a l g o v e r n m e n t was formed in N a n j i n g under Jiang and the first unit e d front was c o m p l e t e l y shattered.
The impact of the "Party purge" on the Communist was t r e m e ndous. We had the change of the top leadership:
Chen Duxiu ( $Sjj , 1880-1 942 ), who was the founder of the CCP and held the post of chief s e c r e t a r y since its formation, was r e p l a c e d by Qu Qiubai ( || , 1 899-1 935 ), who, in a r e ac t i o n to Chen's " c a p i t u l a t i o n i s t i c " policy, initiated, under C o m i n t e r n direction, a p u t s c h i s t Party line. Se v e r a l u p r i s i n g s staged in a d e s p e r a t e attempt to gain v i c t o r y failed. What was worse still, by about a year, party m e m b e r s h i p dro p p e d to less than o n e - f i f t h of
m the figure before the coup.
7
The 1927 coup also made its impact on the literary and the cultural fields. It was at this time that the l e f t - w ingers, most of whom were driven to the literary circle be c a u s e of the defeat in politics, began to initiate liter a r y and cultu r a l activities. A large scale r e v o l u t i o n a r y li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t was soon started in Shanghai, and w i t h i n a few years, l e f t - w i n g l i t e r a t u r e became the d o m i n a n t element, in the literary arena. Hence 1 927 has always been r e g a r d e d as a t u r n i n g point not only in the p o l i t i c a l history, but also in the .history of mod e r n C h inese literature. In fact, the ten years f o l l o w i n g 1927 are co m m o n l y known as the "Left League
Decade" ( The Left League ( ), or in
full, the Chinese League of L e f t - w i n g Wri t e r s ( I WL 1 was a li t e r a r y o r g a n iz a t i o n formed on 2nd March, 1930 under the d i r e c t i o n and c o ntrol of the CCP, after a polemic be t w e e n the l e f t - w i n g e r s had been brought to an end. In the first half of the thirties, the Left League fought a number of lively bat t l e s against n a t i o n a l i s t and i n d e p e n d e n t writers, who were r e g arded by the left as o b s t a c l e s to their r e volution. 1936, the year in w h i c h the League was dissolved, m a r k e d the end of this era as the C o m m u n i s t s called for another c o l l a b o r a t i o n with the KMT against Japanese a g gression.
Dur i n g the years of the "Left League decade", the s urvi v a l of the CCP as a p o litical and m i l i t a r y force was under threat. Jiang Jieshi, firmly e s t a b l i s h e d at Nanjing, .was d e t e r m i n e d to wipe out C o m m u n i s m in China.
Five large scale c a m p a i g n s were launched a g a i n s t the C o m m u n i s t s in the remote areas of J i angxi until they were driv e n out of the s o - c a l l e d Soviet areas and forced on to the Long March in 193^. In Shanghai, the base of the Left League, the s i t u a t i o n was even tougher. "White terror", as it was called, t h r e a t e n e d the life of every left-winger. The p r o p a g a t i o n of their ideas was made d i f f i c u l t be c a u s e of the strict c e n s o r s h i p and the ban n i n g of their p u b l i c a t i o n s . Internally, l e f t - w i n g e r s
9
th e m s e l v e s were tr o u b l e d with i n t r a - P a r t y conflicts.
F a c t i o n a l i s m became a great threat. W i t h i n the same period, the C o m m u n i s t Party was said to have u n d e r g o n e three l e f t - d e v i a t i o n i s t lines under, na m e l y , Qu Qiubai (from August, 1927 to June, 1 928 ), Li Lisan ( $ i H , 1 899-1 967 ) (from 1 929 to September, 1 930 ) and Wang Ming ( 3E , alias of Chen Shaoyu $3 , 1.90^4— 197^) (from
r q 1
1931 to 1936). Literary, a c t i v i t i e s were d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by the party policies, w h ich resulted in c o m m i t t i n g some serious mistakes. To this, we may add that the base of the Left League was not solid. Hence, in its final years, the League itself was split up. The Left League Decade ended with ano t h e r pol e m i c a m ong the l e f t - wingers.
On the other hand, it was not an easy time for the n a t i o n a l i s t s either. A l t h o u g h they had won a t e lling v i c t o r y over the C o m m u n i s t s in 1 927, they still faced other internal enemies. Such w a r l o r d s as Li Zon g r e n (
t : , 1 890- 1 969 ), Li Jichen ( ,1 886-1 959 ), Yan Xishan( HO ^ ill , 1 883-1 960 ) and Feng Yux i a n g ( $| jW ,
1 882-1 9*48), based in d i f f e r e n t parts of the country, posed great threats to the newly e s t a b l i s h e d regime. In the early thirties, several large scale b a t t l e s took place a m ong them. Though Jiang Jieshi fin a l l y e m erged as the victor, the damage was huge. It was r e p o r t e d that three h u n d r e d thousand were killed in one single battle in
[ 9 ]
1931* Such wars also dealt a heavy blow to the economy.
The of f i c i a l figure for m i l i t a r y e x p e n s e s in 1928 was 210 m i l l i o n dollars, while that of 1 930 was 310 million, a fifty pe r c e n t in c r e a s e in three years. To meet these expenses, the g o v e r n m e n t had to issue g o v e r n m e n t bonds. A total of 520 m i l l i o n dollars was issued in
r 1 11
1 9 2 8 — 1930. The s i t u a t i o n was made more acute with the w o r l d w i d e e c o n o m i c slump in 1930.
The same period also saw the J a p a n e s e invasion
into China. In 1931, there was the Mukden Incident, also known as the S e p t e m b e r 18 In c i d e n t ( A — ), in w h i c h the Ja p a n e s e invaded the n o r t h - e a s t e r n part of China and took more than one million.^ square k i l o m e t r e s w i t h i n four months. A few m o n t h s later, in January, 1932, the infam o u s Sh a n g h a i Battle erupted. In both cases, Jiang Jieshi did not take any serious and p o s i t i v e actions aga i n s t the Japanese. He a d o p t e d a policy of " p a c i f i c a t i o n first, then r e s i s t a n c e " ( & P3 M ^ )• In other words, Jiang b e l i e v e d that the C o m m u n i s t s should first be wiped out before China could fight a s u c c e s s f u l e x t ernal war.
This i n e v i t a b l y ar o u s e d a n t i - K M T feeli n g s a m ong the p e o p l e .
T h ro u g h o u t the thirties, the C o m m u n i s t s cont i n u e d to pose a serious m e n a c e to the n a t i o n a l i s t g o vernment.
A l t h o u g h badly hit by the coup, the C o m m u n i s t s g r a d u a l l y gained back some s t r e n g t h o u tside the cities. It was said that with the e x p a n s i o n of the Red Army, the m e mber-
T 1 2l
ship of the Party began to grow again. They were able to build up- a large Soviet Area. The first four campa i g n s launched a g a i n s t them ended in failures on the part of the KMT, r e s u l t i n g in heavy c a s a u l t i e s and economic strains. In Shanghai, the Left League and other leftist cu l t u r a l groups tried every means to p r o p a g a t e Marxist theor i e s and make a t tacks on the a u t h o r i t i e s . The c o n c e s s ion areas could sometimes, though not always, provide shelter for the wanted. One fatal weakness, was: the n a t i o n a l i s t s could not build up any sort of l i t e r a t u r e or
li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t of their own to c o u n t e r - b a l a n c e the i n f l u e n c e of the left.
On the other hand, the left was able to secure the s e rvice of Lu Xun ( ^ , 1 88 1 - 1 936 ), one of those who were di s m a y e d at the coup of Jiang Jieshi. Lu Xun's c o n t r i b u t i o n to the left in the thirties was i n v a l uable. Not to m e n t i o n his actual p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p o l e m i c s against
r ea c t i o n a r y forces, his name alone stood up as a great symbol. A Famous wri t e r and the ment o r of the youth, Lu Xun was able to at t r a c t around him a g r oup of young fighters. This factor alone made him,, such an i m p o r t a n t mem b e r in the l e f t - w i n g li t e r a r y movement. Yet the same factor had ano t h e r serious effect. The s o l i d a r i t y of the leftist camp d e p e n d e d largely on his r e l a t i o n s h i p with the left. He could be a s t r o n g d i v i s i v e force if he was alienated. And the r e l a t i o n s h i p was p r e c a rious. There was no solid base for a g e n u i n e f r i e n d s h i p with the local l e aders and, as we shall see, Lu Xun s o m e t i m e s did hold d i f f e r e n t opinions.
Hence, the period covered in this study can be p e r f e c t l y d e s c r i b e d as "volatile". Both the Comm u n i s t s and the n a t i o n a l i s t s were c o n f r o n t e d with internal as well as e x t ernal foes and problems. So was the entire nation. It was in this c h aotic situation, in the "Paradise
F 1 31
of a d v e n t u r e r s " , S h a n g h a i ,that l e f t - w i n g lite r a t u r e emerged and grew. The p resent research is a study on the l e f t - w i n g l i t e r a r y m o v e m e n t d u r i n g the Left League Decade, with the League itself as the centre of our attention.
11
N O T E S
[1] Jacques Guillermaz, A h i story of the Chinese C o m m u n i s t Party, 1921-19*19 ( T ranslated by Anne Destenay)
(London: M e t h u e n & Co., 1972), p. 68.
[2] Wang J i anmin ( 3E -$t S )» A draft h i s t o r y of the Chinese C o m m u n i s t Party (« ^ 1 ^ i l ' ^ 1 (Taibei:
Z h o n g w e n tushu g o n g y i n g s h e cfi ^ if] || jjjj- , Sept., 1974), pp. 93-94.
[3] Jacques Guillermaz, A h i story of the Chinese Commu n i s t Party, 1 9 2 1 - 1 9 4 9 . p. 70.
[4] I b i d . , p. 83.
[5] For an account of the incident, see James P i n ckney Harrison, The long m a rch to power: A h i s t o r y of the Chinese C o m m u n i s t Party, 1921-72 (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972), pp. 76-82.
[6] I b i d ., p . 1 1 9 .
[7] For example, see Wang Yao, A draft h i story of mode r n Chinese l i t e r a t u r e ( < 0 r ]>£ Jfl ^ > ) (Shanghai:
Shanghai wenyi c h u b a n s h e _b ^ ^ ^ Hi jjrh > Nov., 1 982), p p . 162-216.
[8] Mao Zedong, " R e s o l u t i o n on c e r t a i n q u e s t i o n s in the h i s t o r y of our Party", Selected works of Mao T s e - t u n g [Mao Zedong] (Beijing: F oreign L a n g u a g e s Press,
1 965 ), Vol. Ill, pp. 1 83-1.88 .
[9] Wang Y u n s h e n g ( 3E 33? #1 )» " O b s e r v i n g the tides for ten years" ( ^ ^ ), Guowen z h o u b a o ( <C 11 (15
X I : 1 , quoted in H u ang Yuanqi ( 7G ) > A h istory of modern China ( < 4 1 11 5ft f1 > ) Vol. 1 (Henan: Henan renmin chubanshe, July, 1982), p. 267.
[10] Ibid., p. 277.
[11] I b i d .
[12] James Pi n c k n e y Harrison, The long march to p o w e r , p . 148.
[13] G.E. Miller, Shanghai, the pa r a d i s e of a d v e n tu r e r s (New York: Orsay P u b l i s h i n g House, 1937).
C H A P T E R O N E
T H E P R E - L E A G U E P E R I O D : D E B A T E ON R E V O L U T I O N A R Y L I T E R A T U R E 13
( 1 9 2 7 - 1 9 2 9 ) :
The years between 1927-1929 are g e n e r a l l y taken as. the 11 P r e- L e a g u e P e r i o d 1’ of the Left League Decade, as the Chinese League of L e f t - w i n g W r iters was not formed until February, 1930- Never t h e l e s s , this short period was by no means less i m p o r t a n t than the six League years. We saw a heated debate over the issue of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e among the l e f t - w i n g e r s in Shanghai, who were driven back to the l i t e r a r y arena after the s e t b a c k in politics because of J i ang Jieshi's coup in April, 1927- This r e v o l u t i o n a r y li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t pr o v i d e d the basis for the f o r m a t i o n of the Left League and other l e f t - w i n g li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t s in the thirties.
It is a comm o n p r a c t i c e to divide those involved in the pol e m i c on r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e into three groups. First, the u l tra-left, those who a d v o c a t e d and s u p p o r t e d r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e ardently. Second, the left, those who b a s i c a l l y agreed with r e v o l u t i o n a r y li t e r a t u r e but were not sati s f i e d with the means a d v o c a t e d and the ideas e x p r e s s e d by the first group.
Third, the right, those who were in p r i n c i p l e against the whole thing. The first group was made up of the m e m b e r s of the C r e a t i o n S o c i e t y ( C h u a n g z a o s h e , |pj jit jjtt ) and the Sun Soc i e t y (Taiyangshe, Wa jjth ). The second group was h e a d e d by Lu Xun and Mao Dun ( S f Wi i 1896-1981), r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the T h r e a d - o f - t a l k group (Y u s i p a i ,
M ) and the L i t e r a r y R e s earch A s s o c i a t i o n (Wenxue y a n j iuhui, S i ^ W Hr ). The last group was m a i n l y the C r e s c e n t i s t s (Xinyuepai, ^ ) > with L i a n g S h i q i u (
, 1 902- ) as the key t h eoretician. The p o l e m i c was th r e e - c o r n e r e d : severe a r g u m e n t s took place b e t w e e n the first two groups as well as bet w e e n these first two and the third.
early 1928, there was an argum e n t be t w e e n the u l t r a leftists t h e m s e l v e s over the q u e s t i o n of l e a d e r s h i p in the r e v o l u t i o n a r y literary m ovement. Li ..Chuli ( ^ ), a p r o m i n e n t memb e r of the third stage of the Creation
[ 1 1
Society, la b e l l e d the a r ticle " R e v o l u t i o n and l i t e r a t u r e " ( <C ^ ^ ) i p u b l i s h e d in April, 1926 by Guo Moruo ( ^ ^ , 1 89-2- 1 978 ), one of the founders of the Society, the first voice in the a d v o c a t i o n of
[2]
r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. This idea was u n a c c e p t a b l e to Qian X i n g c u n ( ^ ft$ , 1 900-1977 ) of the Sun Society, who b e l i e v e d that Jiang Guangci ( , 1 90 1 - 1 93 1 ) was at least some two years ahead of Guo Moruo in a d v o c a t i n g r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature, because the former had already p u b l i s h e d an a r t i c l e " P r o l e t a r i a n r e v o l u t i o n and culture"
( ) on 1st August, 1 9 2 4 . C3] This
dispute was u n d e n i a b l y a r e f l e c t i o n of the s e c t a r i a n feeli n g s of the u l t r a - l e f t i s t s . Each of them tried to at t r i b u t e the meri t s to their own groups. The efforts made by earlier a d v o c a t e s were neglected.
It is d i f f i c u l t to give a d e f i n i t i o n of revolution
ary l i terature. The new l i t e r a t u r e c reated s h o r t l y after the May Fourth In c i d e n t (1919) can be re g a r d e d as
" r e v o l u t i o n a r y " , as it was aimed at the d e s t r u c t i o n of old order and the p r o m o t i o n of radical changes. In terms of the form, the use of the new v e r n a c u l a r (xinbaihua,
$T £3 i§ ) was an e m a n c i p a t i o n from the c l a s s i c a l Chinese (wenyan, ^ g ). But obviously, this was not the kind of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e d e m a n d e d by those s e l f - a c c l a i m e d r e v o l u t i o n a r y w r i t e r s in 1927. They would like to have a truly r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e in the M a r x i s t terms. An a c c e p t a b l e d e f i n i t i o n w ould be as follows:
R e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e must c o n s c i o u s l y e n d e a v o u r to "raise the c o n s c i o u s n e s s " of its a u di e n c e - that is, it must pr o m o t e and in c r e a s e the a u d i e n c e ’s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s o c i o - h i s t o r i c r eality a c c o r d i n g to the
1 5
p e r s p e c t i v e of class struggle and the stages of h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t all s o c i e t i e s pass thr o u g h on their way to c o m m u n i s m .[4]
Under this d e finition, works created d u r i n g the May- Fourth were e x c l u d e d from the category' of r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature, bec a u s e class c o n s c i o u s n e s s was not distinct then and the C o m m u n i s t Party was formed only in 1921. It was not until 1922-1923 when we saw the first a d v o c a t i o n of the kind of r e v o l u t i o n a r y lite r a t u r e a g r e e a b l e to a M a r x i s t definition.
In 1922, the Chinese S o c i a l i s t Youth Corps (Zhongguo shehui zhuyi q i n g n i a n t u a n , fH jftfc ^ ^ ^ M ) held its first g e n e r a l meeting. Its m e m b e r s i n c l u d e d the later most i m p o r t a n t me m b e r s of the CCP, Deng Zhongxia ( ^ ,1 896-1 972 ), Yun D a i y i n g ( ft ^ , 1 895-1 931 ), Shen Zemin ( ^ ^ ,1898-193*0 and Xiao Chunu ( M ® »
1897-1927)- The corps passed a r e s o l u t i o n in the general m e e t i n g calli.ng for m embers to take part in various l i t erary a c t i v i t i e s and make l i t e r a t u r e and art pro- l e t a r i a n i z e d . [5] The of f i c i a l organ of the corps, Zhongguo q l ng n i a n (Chinese Y o u t h , C 4^ I! W ^ ^ ) was their base to p u b l i c i z e their r e v o l u t i o n a r y ideas. In Dec., 1923, Deng Z h o n g x i a p u b l i s h e d in it an a r t i c l e called
"Pro f f e r e d to the new poets" > ). In the article, he showed his d i sgust over those poets who took no notice of social problems. He d i s c u s s e d the effect of l i t e r a t u r e on d r i v i n g people to r e v o l ution:
We admit that men are se n t i e n t beings. We .. admit that r e v o l u t i o n s are the e c o n o m i c and p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e s in the face of o p p r e s s i o n in lives. But it is n e c e s s a r y to move p e o ple's s e n t i m e n t first if we want to awa k e n their r e v o l u t i o n a r y c o n s c i o u s n e s s and inspire them so that they have the c o urage for revolution.
You may use sp e e c h e s or t r e a t i s e s to move their sentiment. But the most e f f e c t i v e means is l i t e r a t u r e . [6]
He also urged w r i t e r s to p a r t i c i p a t e in r e v o l u t i o n a r y f 7 1
a c t i v i t i e s and write on the actual life in society.
Deng's close associate, Yun D a i y i n g e x p r e s s e d a s imilar idea in a short essay called " L i t e r a t u r e and re v o l u t i o n " ( )• He b e l i e v e d that part- c i p a t i o n in r e v o l u t i o n was a p r e - r e q u i s i t e for w r i t i n g r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. His logic was: as l i t e r a t u r e was a pro d u c t of the noble and sacred f e e l i n g s of m a n kind, one had to have r e v o l u t i o n a r y fe e l i n g s first before one could create r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r ature; and as one could a c q u i r e r e v o l u t i o n a r y feeli n g s only through p a r t i c i p a t i o n in r e v o lutions, one had to become a
r
8
1r e v o l u t i o n a r y first. He did not mean to say that all r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s would become r e v o l u t i o n a r y writers.
"Among these r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s , there will be s o meone who has a b u n d a n t feelings and he will c e r t a i n l y create r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r at u r e . " [91 This concept, as we shall see, is i d e n t i c a l to those put forward by r e v o l u t i o n a r y w r i t e r s from 1926 onwards.
Shen Zemin, y o u n g e r b r other of the famous writer, Mao Dun, was also a pio n e e r in r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature.
On 15th December, 1923, one week before Deng Z h o n g x i a pu b l i s h e d " P r o f e r r e d to the new poets", he had already called for the wr i t e r s to "go among the p e o p l e " . I n an o t h e r essay, " L i t e r a t u r e and r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e "
( C S i H ^ ^ ^ ) , he de c l a r e d that a g r eat change was a p p r o a c h i n g and the whole s t r u c t u r e of s o c i e t y was shattering. P r o l e t a r i a n s of the world had a w a k e n e d from their sleep. A r e v o l u t i o n a r y writer, b e ing their s p o k e s man, should use l it e r a t u r e as a means to e x p r e s s the T 1 11 desires, s u f f e r i n g s and wis h e s of the oppressed.
More i m p o r t a n t still, he was able to b r i n g out the issue of p r o l e t a r i a n c o n s c i o u s n e s s . He believed that one who had only r e v o l u t i o n a r y ideas could not cre a t e r e v o l u t i o n ary litera t u r e . Unless one had joined a workers' strrke, or had b e e n t h r o w n into prison or chased by police, or
1 7
had done h a n d w o r k and r e c eived i l l - t r e a t m e n t from employers, one could never u n d e r s t a n d the s u b c o n s c i o u s ness of p r o l e t a r i a n s and could never be q u a l i f i e d to
[ 12]
write r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature.
Hence, Zhong g u o q i n g n i a n was in fact a very impo r t a n t p u b l i c a t i o n in our study of r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. But except once in the early t h i r t i e s when Qian X ingcun was able to m e n t i o n it in his study on
[ 1 3 ]
m o d e r n Chinese literature, it had often been n e g l e c t e d until the fifties when literary h i s t o r i a n s
[ 1 i|]
began to talk about them again. The rea s o n for their being o v e r l o o k e d is p o s s i b l y that no m o v e m e n t of any sort was ever s p arked off by the few essays in the p u b l i c a t i o n . ' That the issue of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e was taken up again and turned into a w i d e s p r e a d mo v e m e n t was largely the work of Jiang Guangci of the Sun Society and Guo Moruo of the Creat i o n Society.
Jiang Guangci was also a mem b e r of the Chinese S o c i a l i s t Youth Corps. He joined it in the winter of 1920 . ^ " ^ In 1922, he became a member of the C C P . ^ ^ From 1921 to 1924, he studied in the O r i e n t a l U n i v e r s i t y of Moscow. Upon his return, he lectured on Marxist
T 1 71
s o c i o l o g y at the CCP-run S h a nghai U n iversity. In the same year, he p u b l i s h e d his first book of poetry, New Dr earns ( W ^ ), w hich was regarded by many as the first fruit of r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. In the poems, Jiang Gu.angci called for a world r e v o l u t i o n and the a w a k e n i n g of the prolet a r i a t . He also called for the downfall of i m p e r i a l i s m and an end to civil wars between w arlords. His first piece of fiction, "The y oung tramp"
( ), w h ich was p u b l i s h e d in 1 926, was d e s c r i b e d by Qian X ingcun as a piece of " p r o l e t a r i a n r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e " and "a g e nuine record of the g e r m i n a t i o n period of p r o l e ta r i a n r e v o l u t i o n a r y
r 1 p i
literature". His s u b s e q u e n t ^ works, such as "On the River Yalu" ( ) and " Des S a n s - c u l o t t e s "
K f i # SS > ), are all important, though may not be good ones, pieces in r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature. [193
But he was slow in put t i n g forth theory. This is not s u r p r i s i n g as in 1 928 he still in s i s t e d that "what we demand from w r i t e r s are literary and r e v o l u t i o n a r y creations, not those empty and elusive t r e a t i s e s which can be w r i t t e n by a n y b o d y " . On the other hand, the c o n t r i b u t i o n of the C r e a t i o n Society in the t h e o r e t i c a l field was much greater. In fact, as we shall see, the d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s of the two groups towards theories c o n s t it u t e d a major source of confl i c t b e t w e e n the Sun Society and the Creat i o n Society.
We know that the idea of forming the Creation Society o r i g i n a t e d in a m e e t i n g between Guo Moruo and Zhang Ziping ( Zji ,1 8 9 3-1 9*17-) in Honshu, Japan in August, 1918. It was not until 1921 when c o n c r e t e plans were set up for the e s t a b l i s h e m e n t of the Soc i e t y and the p u b l i c a t i o n of the C h u a n g z a o jikan ( |pj jgj gjs fIj , C r e a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y ) that the Creation So c i e t y could be
[21 3
said to , have come into existence. In its early stage, the C r e a t i o n i s t s a d v o c a t e d the r o m a n t i c idea of
"art for art's sake". In their journals, we saw the i n t r o d u c t i o n of such w e s t e r n r o m a n t i c s as Goethe (17*19- 1 832 ), Walt W h i t m a n ( 1 81 9-1 892 ), Lord Byron ( 1 788-1 82*1 ) and P.B. ..Shelley ( 1 792-1 822). They d e n o u n c e d in particular the s o - c a l l e d "artistic u t i l i t a r i a n i s m " and for this reason, a p e n - b a t t l e e rupted b e tween the S o c i e t y and the L i t e r a r y R e s e a r c h Associ a t i o n . But before long, there were signs of change. In May, 1923, in the same issue of C h u a n g z a o z h oubao ( < i(] jit Ml fR > , Creat i o n W e e k l y ) , Guo Moruo p u b l i s h e d a short essay called "Our new literary m o v e m e n t " ( < & ■£ & ¥ r S ffi > ) and Yu Dafu ( # ft 5^ ,
1 896- 1 9*1*1 ) p u b l i s h e d "Class struggle in lit e r a t u r e "
( 3>C Ju. M HI ^ ^ )• In Guo's article, the deeds of the m i l i t a r i s t s , p o l i t i c i a n s and c a p i t a l i s t s were condemned. At the end of it, Guo cried put loudly:
We are aga i n s t the evil dragon of c a p i t alism.
Our m o v e m e n t must d e velop in l i t e r a t u r e the p r o l e t a r i a n spirit and expose human nature in its n a k e d n e s s .[22]
On the other hand, Yu Dafu -jnentioned in his art i c l e that the great Rus s i a n people had a l ready e s t a b l i s h e d "a solemn and g r eat p r o l e t a r i a n ki n g d o m " and that the class struggle of t w e n t i e t h c e ntury l i t e r a t u r e was taki n g the same pace as the actual class struggle in society. [23]
He even quoted words from the C o m m u n i s t M a n i f e s t o and made an appeal to p r o l e t a r i a n s and the o p p r e s s e d to unite to g e t h e r in an effort to realize their i d e a l s . [24]
D e spite these, we should not rashly conclude, as some critics do, that the two ar t i c l e s were "the preludes to the later r e v o l u t i o n a r y liter a r y m o v e m e n t " . [25] A closer look at the a r t i c l e s will show that the two Creat i o n i s t s , in early 1923* were still in their romantic stage.
It is p o s s i b l e that Guo Moruo aimed at s t a r t i n g a new li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t with his a r ticle - its title had a strong hint of this. But o b v i o u s l y he did not have r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e in mind. In the essay, there were two i m p o r t a n t lines:
The kind of l i t e r a t u r e ident i c a l to the Huanghe and Yangzi Jiang!
This is the m o tto we be l i e v e i n . [26]
But what is the kind of l i t e r a t u r e i d e n t i c a l to the H u anghe and Yangzi Jiang? Guo Moruo said,
The river systems of the Hu a n g h e and Yangzi Jiang are the two great m a s t e r p i e c e s s u g g e s t e d to us by nature. R e c e i v i n g rain and dew f-rom the sky, a b s o r b i n g ru n n i n g w ater from the ground, d i s s o l v i n g all external s u b s t a n c e s in themselves, m a k i n g them all their own blood, they roll on and on, rol l i n g out of all t h e m
1 9
selves. Any stones b l o c k i n g them will be d estroyed! Any u n r e a s o n a b l e dams will be d e s troyed! Brace up the entire blood and energy, brace up all of the spirits, flow into the eternal sea of p e a c e . [2 7]
If the f ig u r a t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n is strip p e d off, we can see that what Guo Moruo d e m a n d e d from l i t e r a t u r e was a true and c o m p l e t e e x p r e s s i o n (" o u t f l o w " ) of the '‘self"
(ziwo, fij ). The r e b e l l i o u s n e s s was but a result of this demand as what he called for d e s t r u c t i o n were those w h ich h i n d e r e d and o b s t r u c t e d the e x p r e s s i o n of the self.
Similarly, Yu D a f u ’s "class s t r u g g l e " had not h i n g to do with the p r o l e t a r i a n class st r u g g l e a g a i n s t the bo u r geoisie. The f o l l o w i n g lines reveal Y u ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the e x pr e s s i o n clearly:
The m a t e r i a l s taken up by them are mostly r e f l e c t i o n s of class struggles. For instance, the drama "Die Burger von Calais" by Georg Kaiser shows the st r u g g l e be t w e e n ju s t i c e and cruelty. The tr a g e d y "Ein G e s c h le c h t " by Fritz von Unruh shows the strug g l e b e t w e e n mother and son. Walter H a s e n c l e v e r ' s "Der Sohn" shows the strug g l e b e t w e e n father and s o n . [28]
Here, Yu Dafu i n t e r pr e t e d class s t r uggle in its br o a d e s t sense, that is, a n y t h i n g that is r eb e l l i o u s and a g ainst set t r a d i t i o n is class struggle. D o u b t l e s s it is not M a r x i s t but nihilist. [29] Moreover, most of the famous w r i t e r s pra s i e d by Yu in the article, such as Charles
Ba u d e l a i r e ( 1 82 1- 1 867 ), Paul Verla i n e ( 1 8 4 4 — 1896) , Romain Holland (1866-1944), Georges Duhamel, Max Barthel and Franz Wer f e l (1890-1945), cannot be regar d e d as Marxists and they had not a d v o c a t e d the kind of l i t e r a t u r e a c c e p t a b l e to the C hinese r e v o l u t i o n a r y writers.
Guo Moruo h i m s e l f c o n s i d e r e d his change into a b e l i e v e r of M a r x i s m came with his t r a n s l a t i o n of £he Ja p a n e s e M a r x i s t K a w a k a m i Ha j i m e ' s ( fnj _h fit: , 1 879-1 946 ) book Social o r g a n i z a t i o n and social r e v o l u t i o n ( <C It lit M nth # ^ 1ur » . t-2 9 l it was April, 1 924 .*-3° 3 Guo said,
"It clari f e d my past mud d l e d thinkings. From then on, I [*3 1 ]
c hanged my d i r e c t i o n to Marxism". Then in- May, 1 926, he p u b l i s h e d his famous " R e v o l u t i o n and literature", w hich is w i d e l y a c c e p t e d as being t h e ^ o n e to spark off the r e v o l u t i o n a r y li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t in 1927-28.
Ch anges in society were also of u t m o s t importance.
A dvoc a t e s of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e in 1927 almost u n a n i m o u s l y took the May T h i r t i e t h M o v e m e n t in 1925 as the main factor for c a u s i n g the r e v o l u t i o n a r y liter a r y movement. On 30th May, 1925, British poli c e in the S h a nghai I n t e r n a t i o n a l S et t l e m e n t opened fire to the d e m o n s t r a t o r s p r o t e s t i n g the k i l l i n g and ar r e s t s of a g i t a t o r s in st r i k e s aga i n s t J a p a n e s e - o w n e d cott o n mills that had been g o i n g on since April. This was f o l lowed by a gen e r a l strike of merchants, workers and students. It was not until S e p t e m b e r that all f a c t o r i e s resumed operation. [32] But this s o - c a l l e d May T h i r t i e t h M o v ement spread qu i c k l y to other cities, i n c l u d i n g Hankou, Na n j i n g and Chongqing. [33] The most famous was the great Hong K o n g - G u a n g z h o u strike w hich lasted for s i x t e e n months from June, 1925 till October, 1926, the longest in Chinese history. The a c t i v e n e s s of the w o r k i n g class was u np r e c e d e n t e d . A c c o r d i n g to a re s e a r c h report by the General Union of Shanghai, over 156,000 joined in the
[ohl strike in the m o n t h bet w e e n 5th May and 13th June.
This n a t i o n w i d e m o v e m e n t of Chinese w o r k e r s was viewed as an a w a k e n i n g of the c o n s c i o u s n e s s of the p r o l etariat.
S ee i n g the i m mense power of the workers, i n t e l l e c t u a l s came to the b e l i e f that a new r e v o l u t i o n a r y age had a p p r o a c h e d . The li t e r a r y scene, being one ele m e n t of the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e , had to change accor d i n g l y . R e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e was the best answer. Qian X i n g c u n ' s words were typical:
After the May T h i r t i e t h Incident, the class p o s i t i o n s in China su d d e n l y u n d e r w e n t a great change. The class power of w o r k e r s and p e a sants were shown up gradually. At this time, the long a w a i t i n g fourth class l i t e r a t u r e began to
2 T
r i s e . [35]
The impact of the May T h i r t i e t h I n c i d e n t on the C o m m u n i s t Party was t r e m e n d o u s too... Its m e m b e r s h i p i n c r e a s e d tenfo l d s in six months, from 1,000 in May to
10.000 in November, 1925. In the next eight months, it t r ipled to 30,000 (July, 1926) and d o u b l e d a g ain to 58.000 in early April, 1 9 - 2 7 . ^ ^ It was p o s s i b l y for this reason that so much wei g h t was g iven to the incident.
Many of the r e v o l u t i o n a r y w r i t e r s were e y e w i t n e s s e s of the May T h i r t i e t h Movement. In fact, some of them a c t u a l l y p a r t i c i p a t e d in le a d i n g strikes and d e m o n s t r a t i o n s . In early 1926, all the most important C r e a t i o n i s t s found t h e m s e l v e s g a t h e r e d in Guangzhou. Guo M o r u o ' s " R e v o l u t i o n and lit e r a t u r e " was w r i t t e n and publi s h e d in this "cradle for r e v olution". Hence, the first bullet of the r e v o l u t i o n a r y li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t was fired at Guangzhou, rather than Shanghai. It was after the "party purge" of the n a t i o na l i s t s in April, 1927 that writers, taki n g refuge in the c o n c e s s i o n areas, b r ought the issue to Shanghai.
In this first article, Guo Moruo m e c h a n i c a l l y d i vided l i t e r a t u r e into two c a tegories: r e v o l u t i o n a r y and c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y literatures. Guo a s s e r t e d that in r e v o lutions, there were always two o p p o s i n g classes:
the o p p r e s s e d and the o ppressing:
„ At such a time, each class will of course have its own spokesman, and what you say dep e n d s on what class you side with. If you take the side of the o p p r e s s i n g class, you are c e r t a i n l y c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y . If you side with the o p p r e s s e d class, you will s upport r e volution.
When you are c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y , the kind of l i t e r a t u r e you p r oduce or a p p r e c i a t e will d e f i n i t e l y be c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature, the one s p e a k i n g for the o p p r e s s i n g class.
This kind of l i t e r a t u r e does not c o r r e s p o n d to r e vo l u t i o n and would be d e s p i s e d and d i s owned by r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s . But if you are s y m p a t h e t i c with revolution, the works you create or
2 3
a p p r e c i a t e will be r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature, sp e a k i n g in the name of the o p p r e s s e d class.
[37]
Guo Moruo argued that r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e was the v a n g u a r d of r e v o l u t i o n and it would bring a gold era of literature. On the other hand, c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e was valueless. "What is l i t e r a t u r e is always r e v o l u t i o n a r y , and there is only one kind of true
r o o 1
literature: r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e . " His c o n c l u s i o n was : l i t e r a t u r e and r e v o l u t i o n were not i n c o m p a t i b l e but i n e x t r i c a b l y linked in a unity.
A l t h o u g h there might not have been any s y s t e m a t i c p l a n n i n g before hand, the a p p e a r a n c e of " R e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e and its p e r e n n i a l i t y " (
'14 ) by ano t h e r p r o m i n e n t member Cheng F a n g w u ( E5, tfr H , 1 897- ), i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g the p u b l i c a t i o n of G u o ’s a r ticle i n e v i t a b l y led others to bel i e v e that the C reat i o n Society, which had been a d v o c a t i n g "art for a r t ’s sake", now shifted to p r o m o t i n g r e v o l u t i o n a r y l iterature. Meanwhile, Lu Xun, who in the past did not have a high op i n i o n on the b e h a v i o u r of the Society, [39] f u r n i s h e d the idea of c o - o p e r a t i n g with the Cr e a t i o n i s t s . On 7th November, 1926, Lu wrote in a letter to Xu G u a n g p i n g ( ff H? , 1 898- 1 968 ):
In fact, I have one more ambition.' I hope that upon my arrival at Guangzhou, I can carry on with my fight a g a i n s t the " g e n tlemen". . . . Secondly, unite with the Creat i o n S o c i e t y in a front to att a c k the old s o c i e t y , [40]
On the other hand, it seemed that the C r e a t i o n i s t s also w e l c o m e d an a l l i a n c e with Lu Xun. A c c o r d i n g to Guo Moruo, it was Guo who r e c o m me n d e d Lu Xun to the Sun
[4 1 ]
Ya t-sen U n i v e r s i t y . But upon the l a t t e r ’s arrival, most of the Creat i o n i s t s , except Cheng Fangwu, had al r e a d y left G u a n gzhou. [42] Almost at the same time, Cheng Fangwu p u b l i s h e d the p ro v o c a t i v e " C o m p l e t e our li t e r a r y r e v o l ut i o n " ( < to J& f] t$] % ^ ^ ^ > )• In the article, C h eng c o m p l a i n e d that the li t e r a r y m o v e m e n t had been badly dam a g e d by those writers who sought only
"fun" ("quwei", $1 ^ ) and t r easured "leisure, leisure and leisure". [43] A number of w e l l - k n o w n wr i t e r s were named for criticism. Among them was Lu X u n , who was c o n d e m n e d for c o l l e c t i n g and co p y i n g .old fictions. [44]
Lu Xun did not seem to be annoyed. W h ile he was in Guangzhou, he f r e q u e n t l y vis i t e d the C r e a t i o n Society.
In his pri v a t e letters, he named the C r e a t i o n Soc i e t y as one of the three groups which c o n t i n u e d to make c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the li t e r a r y arena, and he even said that
" r e l ations with the Creat i o n society seem to be very good". [45] Then on 20th February, he r e c e i v e d a letter from Cheng Fangwu, i n v i t i n g Lu to issue a p r o c l a m a t i o n . [ ^6] p r o c l a m a t i o n from the Chinese w r i t e r s to the B r i t i s h i n t e l l e c t u a l s and g e neral public" ( < pi s§£
M t k ^ US Wi ^ itl M can be r e g a r d e d as
the first c o - o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n Lu Xun and the Creation Society, bec a u s e with the e x c e p t i o n of Lu Xun, all s i g n a t o r i e s were m e m b e r s of the Society. [47] Together they a p p e a l e d to the B r i t i s h public for joint actions with the Chinese a g a i n s t Bri t i s h and other i m p e r i alists.
[48]
Lu Xun made his first u t t e r a n c e on r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e on 8th April, 1 927 in an a ddress to the Hu a n g p u M i l i t a r y Academy, less than a week before Jiang Jieshi took act i o n s a g ainst the Communists. A l t h o u g h the speech was e n t i t l e d " L i t e r a t u r e of a r e v o l u t i o n a r y p e r i o d " ( < ^ . ^ ^ , Lu Xun decried the i m p o rtance of literature, say i n g that l i t e r a t u r e would only be taken up by the weakest, most useless people w h ile those who were str o n g would c o n tinue to kill w i t h o u t saying a n y t h i n g or pay i n g any a t t e n t i o n to what were said by others. To him, the remedy for China was a s u c c e s s f u l revolution, rather than l i t e r a t u r e of any sort. "A poem could not have f r i g h t e n e d away Sun C h u a n g f a n g [ 5^ >
1844-1935], but a cannon shell scared him away,
As for the q u e s t i o n of r e v o l u t i o n and literature, Lu Xun s u g g e s t e d a t h r e e - s t a g e r e l a t i o n s h i p . In the first stage, before the o u t b r e a k of r e volution, there was a l i t e r a t u r e of d i s c o n t e n t against i n e q u a l i t i e s of society. In the second stage, when r e v o l u t i o n was u n d e r way, there was s ilence only, as people would be ac t i v e l y
engaged in ac t i o n s and could have no time for literature.
In the third ' stage, when -a s u c c e s s f u l r e v o l u t i o n was over, two kinds of l i t e r t u r e would appear: one e u l o g i z i n g the r e v o l u t i o n and one b e m o a n i n g the past. But the w r i t i n g of these two kinds of l i t e r a t u r e w o uld not last long. After that, there might be a "people's l i t e r a t u r e "
( p i n g m i n w e n x u e , zp ]=£ ^ Jpi ) . ^50]
For these reasons, Lu Xun tried to rej e c t others' (inc l u d i n g Guo Moruo, by all means) a s s e r t i o n that l i t e r a t u r e played a big part in revolution. To him, it was r e v o l u t i o n that played a big part in l i terature. But he did not mean to deny the exist e n c e of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e :
Fo.r revolution, we need r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s , but r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i te r a t u r e can wait, for only when r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s start w r i t i n g can there be r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e . [5 1 ]
Lu Xun did not bel i e v e that there had a l r e a d y been the e x i s t e n c e of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e in China. Nor was it likely that the l i t e r a t u r e would soon appear. This cautious a t t i t u d e was p o s s i b l y born out of the d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t upon his arr i v a l in Guangzhou. At first, he was d e l i g h t e d and happy to be there, s a y i n g that the
f 5 21
people were more lively than those elsewhere. But it did not take long for him to find out that G u a n g z h o u was not d i f f e r e n t from other places. Just like the red banners w r i t t e n in white characters, it was "white w i t h i n red". He w a r n e d that Guangzhou, the cradle for revolution, could be the cradle for c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n
2 5
But it is w r ong to say that Lu Xun * s ad d r e s s to
the Hua n g p u M i l i t a r y A c ademy "would p r o b a b l y have touched off a fiery debate in- G u a n g z h o u " had there not been the party purge of Jiang Jieshi several days later. C54] It is n e c e s s a r y to point out that afte*p the purge, in October, Lu Xun wrote on the issue of r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a t u r e again. The ideas made in the speech were repeated :
I b e lieve the ba.sic pro b l e m is w h e t h e r the wri t e r is a "r e v o l u t i o n a r y " . If yes, it is r e v o l u t i o n a r y literature, no m a t t e r what topic is w r i t t e n and what m a t e r i a l s are used. What comes out from the pipe is water; from the vein, blood....
There is no r ev o l u t i o n when r e v o l u t i o n a r y wri t e r s appear in large n u m b e r s . [55]
These ideas were not rebuked by the r e v o l u t i o n a r y w r iters in 1 928. In fact, the r e la t i o n s b etween Lu Xun and his later a n t a g o n i s t s in the r e v o l u t i o n a r y l i t e r a r y polemic were at their best when Lu Xun went to Sh a n g h a i after the coup.
Both -Lu Xun and Guo Moruo a rrived Sh a n g h a i in October, 19£7. In view of the defeat in politics, Guo wanted to do s o m e t h i n g in the literary field. Zheng Boqi ( ul » 1 895-1 979 ) re c a l l e d that it was he who p r o posed to Guo an a l l i a n c e with Lu Xun. Zheng, toget h e r with Jiang Gua n g c i and Duan k e q i n g ( psfe nT 'fff ,1 899- ), visited [57 ] Lu Xun on 9th November, 1 927 to discuss the issue.
Lu Xun "gladly a g reed" and sugge s t e d to revive the C h u a n g z a o z h o u b a o . [587 On 3rd December, an a d v e r t i s e m e n t a n n o u n c i n g the r e vival of the weekly a p p e a r e d in the Shishi x i n b a o ( <C ^ $T f R > , Current a f f a i r s news) . The four e d itors listed in the a d v e r t i s e m e n t were all me m b e r s of the C r e a t i o n Society: Cheng Fangwu, Zheng Boqi, Duan K e q i n g and Wa n g D u q i n g ( EE , 1898-1940 ). Lu Xun * s name o c c u p i e d the first p o s i t i o n in the list of special c o n t r i b u t o r s , a m ong those of Guo Moruo (pseud. Mai
Keang, ) and Feng N a ichao 1901-1983).
The a d v e r t i s e m e n t also said that the week l y would come out on the first day of 1 9 2 8 . ^ ^
But it did not app e a r as announced. Instead, in the C h u a n g z a o y u e k a n w h ich came out that day, there was yet ano t h e r notice, sayi n g that the w e e k l y would be publ i s h e d on the first Sunday of the year. A longer list of special contr i b u t o r s , thirty a l together, was given.
The list was of g reat s i g n i fi c a n c e as it i n c l u d e d almost all those invol v e d in the r e v o l u t o n a r y l i t e r a r y polemic.
Lu Xun was again leading, followed by Jiang G u angci who soon founded the Sun Society. Others of this group in the list were Yang Cunren ( £j§ 105 , 1 90 1 - 1 955 ) and Meng Chao ( ^ j|£ ). We can also see the y o u n g Creat i o n i s t s , i n c l u d i n g Li Chuli, Feng Na i c h a o and Peng Kang ( M ),
r c 1 "|
among the old ones Guo Moruo and Cheng Fangwu.
Should C h u a n g z a o z houbao come out as planned, there might have been a great c o - o p e r a t i o n a m o n g w r iters in Shanghai. But this c o - o p e r a t i o n never m a t e r i a l i z e d . In a reprint of the a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d C h u a n g z a o y u e k a n , the a d v e r t i s e m e n t was taken out and r e p l a c e d by an
"Urgent not i c e of the change of C h u a n g z a o zho u b a o into Wen h u a pipan [ <C 41 ^ > Critique of culture] ^ ^
Obviously, someone wit h i n the C r e a t i o n Society o p posed the plan of c o - o p e r a t i o n . Lu Xun was c o m p l e t e l y in the dark and he later c o m p l a i n e d that he simply did not know why the plan of r e v i v i n g C h u a n g z a o zho u b a o was dro p p e d and why he became target of attacks. Most people put the blame on Cheng Fangwu and other young Creat i o n i s t s . True enough, the young c r itics opp o s e d a c o - o p e r a t i o n with Lu Xun. But it was Guo Moruo who first c o m m i t t e d a m i s t a k e by not c o n s u l t i n g and s e e k i n g the c onsent of Cheng Fangwu before hand. Guo said in r e t r o spect,
At the time when I laid the plan, Fang w u had a l r e a d y gone to Japan. I thought he woiild a ccept the plan. In order to speed up the p r o gress, I had not asked for his o p i n i o n before
hand. [64]
2 7
r f\ r i
This was c o n f i r m e d by Zheng Boqi. Zheng also revea l e d that while he was in Japan, he had alr e a d y been on good terms with Li Chuli, Feng Naichao, Peng Kang and Zhu Jingwo ( ^ 3% , 1901 — 1941 ) . Except Z-fou who stu d i e d in Tokyo Im p e r i a l U n iversity, they all studied in the same school, Kyoto Imper i a l University. They had d i s c u s s e d the p r o m o t i o n of p r o l e t a r i a n literature. Now in Shanghai, he told Cheng Fangwu about -this. Cheng went to Japan to hold d i s c u s s i o n s with t h e m . C o n s e quently, two plans, one with Lu Xun and one with the young radicals, were being p ursued at the same time.
At the end of 1927, these young r a d i c a l s returned to Shanghai. It is d i f f i c u l t to e s t a b l i s h for sure what h a p p e n e d i m m e d i a t e l y fo l l o w e d b e cause d i f f e r e n t people told d i f f e r e n t stories. Feng Naichao r e c a l l e d in 1978:
I have to make it clear, we did not oppose joi n i n g with Lu Xun. From what I can recall, I had not heard of a n y t h i n g about the plan of c o - o p e r a t i o n at the time when I re t u r n e d to China. Fangwu had not told us a n y t h i n g about t h i s .[673
He did not tell us why the plan was dropped. What he me ant was: he did not know there was such a plan at all, and he was not a g a i n s t the plan. These w ords are not c o n v i n c i n g as his name a p p e a r e d in the list of c o n tributors, t o g e t h e r with that of Lu Xun; and the idea of c h a n g i n g C h u a n g z a o z h oubao into Wenhua pipan was certa i n l y f o r m u l a t e d after their return from Japan. Guo Moruo supplied a d i f f e r e n t version:
“ The two plans could not go hand in hand. The J a p a n e s e fire met the Sh a n g h a i water. At the beginning, there was a deadlock. I s u ggested w a i t i n g until F a n g w u 1s return before making any decision. A t e l e g r a m was sent to him and he r e t u r n e d from Japan soon after. He stron g l y op posed the revival of C h u a n g z a o zhoubao, say i n g that its m i s s i o n was over. He suppo r t e d the s u g g e s t i o n of the re t u r n e d f riends * of p u b l i s h i n g a m i l i t a n t m o n t h l y cal l e d Kangliu C ’C , O p p o s i n g stream] (this title was not ad o p t e d buT changed into Wen h u a pipan). As for c o - o p e r a t i o n with Lu X u n , e v e r y o n e was i n d i f f e r e n t .[68]
Here, Guo Moruo said that he insisted on a union with Lu Xun. It looks as if there was a hot deb a t e over the issue. ^ 9 ] But Zheng Boqi pointed out that Guo Moruo agreed on the plan of the newco m e r s even before their return :
All of them [the y o ung C r e a t i o n i s t s ] were ready to quit school and come back. Fangwu w r ote us a letter, t e l l i n g us this news. We were all very happy . and anxious to see their arrival. Moruo and I also agreed to Fangwu's new plan. The pr e v i o u s plan of a u n i o n [with Lu Xun] was then d r o p p e d . [7 0]
Zheng even said that Guo Moruo se c r e t l y met the n e w c o m e r s [7 1 ]
and they agr e e d on the work for the future.
Thus Guo M o r u o ' s a t t i t u d e is open to question.
Did he sup p o r t the plan of u n i t i n g with Lu Xun or that of the n e w c o m e r s ? The r e c o l l e c t i o n s of the people i n vol v e d have to be taken with great care as they were w r i t t e n a long time after the incident. The writers might have f o r g o t t e n the details. What is more, there might even be d e l i b e r a t e d i s t o r t i o n s - no one would now p u b l i c l y adtnit to h a v i n g s h unned Lu Xun. J u d g i n g from later d e v e l o p m e n t s - that an urgent notice a p p e a r e d in such a short time, that Wenh u a pipan was able to come out on. 15th January, 1928, and that Guo Moruo c o n t i n u e d to s u pport the a c ti v i t i e s of the Creat i o n Society, we may surmise that the fr i c t i o n within the S o c i e t y could not have been great. Guo Moruo might not have w a n t e d to drop the plan of u n i t i n g with Lu Xun, but c e r t a i n l y he was not a g a i n s t c o - o p e r a t i n g with the r e t u r n e d students.
This new d e v e l o p m e n t a l i e n a t e d not only Lu Xun, but also a n o t h e r group of young fighters who had put their names on the list of special c o n t r i b u t o r s but u l t i m a t e l y formed the Sun Society. However, it is wrong to assume that they formed a se p a r a t e soc i e t y because of the failure to revive C h u a n g z a o z h o u b a o . This was only a catalyst. A c c o r d i n g to Yang Cunren, one of the founders of the Sun Society, the idea of p u b l i s h i n g T aivang
2 9
