Methods and Practices: Research on Sino-Western Literary Relations

Author: Song Binghui
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2004-10-01
Features: American comparative literary critic Rene Wellek once discussed the discipline of comparative literature in his book Literary Theory and said, "I recommend comparative literature here, of course, without implying any neglect of the study of national literatures. In fact, it is precisely the 'ethnic characteristics of literature' and the unique contributions each nation makes to the overall literary process that should be understood as the core issues of comparative literature."① I believe that the unique contributions of national literatures mentioned by Wellek must be placed within the relationships among national literatures and viewed in the dynamic process of the development of multiculturalism in the world, that is, they should be observed and analyzed in the pluralistic, holistic, systematic, and changing process of world literature and culture. If modernization itself contains different developmental forms such as the advanced and the late-developing, the endogenous and the exogenous, and if these two are in fact interdependent, then literature, which expresses and explores the experience of modernity, should similarly possess at least two different types of modernity. This is reflected in the overall characteristics of national literature as the expression of the modernity experience of the advanced, dominant colonial colonialist countries (nations), and the late-developing,,（）, as well as the two types of expression formed in the process of expressing these two experiences (which are yet distinct from each other). In this sense, the enduring vitality of national consciousness, the tension between ethnicity and worldliness, the contradiction between collective consciousness and individual independence, the intense conflict between tradition and modernity, the prominent role of foreign influences in literary resources, and the constant antagonism between literary aesthetics and literary function are all constituent elements of the unique modernity experience of the latter, as well as manifestations of its unique contribution to world literature. Compared to Western literature of the advanced modernizing countries,, including China, possesses more and richer experiences of modern ethnic cultural exchanges (especially ethnic and cultural conflicts), because most of the historical events (including spiritual ones) of their exchanges and conflicts are largely carried out within the "local" of these national literatures and cultures, and often create a life-or-death tension. Therefore, this cultural and psychological experience is also a deeply ingrained life experience. This experience, as a whole, includes the experience of resistance to dominant culture and literature, and this resistance is not simply opposing the West or the powers, but first and foremost continuous learning, imitation, and dialogue with dominant culture and literature, while simultaneously projecting a strong sense of identification toward other nations in the same position, and continuously creating and experiencing in the process of resistance, gradually establishing a national subjectivity. In cultural trends and the literary field, this resistance and dialogue often manifest in the form of intense upheavals. In the short hundred years of the 20th century, all Western culture since the Renaissance has become the object of introduction and reference for modern China, corresponding to which, the experience of cultural expression can only take place in the gaps of the introduction and translation of this dominant culture. The diachronic, pluralistic intellectual, cultural, and literary resources are unfolded in a synchronic way on the same plane in a short period of time, making the conflicts and contradictions between various trends inevitable. I believe that exploring the special experience of modern Chinese culture and its expression in literature is precisely the key content that highlights the global factors of modernity in Chinese literature. In the field of Sino-foreign literary relations, studying the large-scale introduction and translation of various foreign literatures in the 20th century, as well as the impact of these foreign literary trends and works on China, is a quite important aspect, and the inspirational significance of the translation studies in comparative literature and contemporary translation cultural theory is gradually being recognized by the domestic academic community. However, the translation of foreign literature, as a cross-cultural practice, can only be truly accepted by the latter through further friction, collision, resonance, and communication with local literature. Therefore, it must enter the subjective interior of local literary trends and creative practices after completing the linguistic transformation of the text, thereby acquiring a dynamic classic nature, that is, being able to possess creative qualities and gain creative historical opportunities. After determining whether or not foreign literary trends and creations can enter the target culture, the cultural factors that determine their creativity to a certain extent are undoubtedly quite important, and in a specific historical and cultural space, they can even be a filtering mechanism for creativity. For China, a late-developing modernizing country, regardless of what the domestic situation or international circumstances are, national consciousness can always find its reason for existence and is always to some extent determining and influencing the introduction and acceptance of foreign literature. For other nations in similar modernizing international circumstances, their cultural and literary exchanges and understanding can have more common points in this regard. Of course, this does not mean that only literary works that reflect the theme of resisting colonial (or post-colonial) rule and depicting national independence and people's liberation are the common points between the literary identities of late-developing modernizing countries (nations), or the premise of their literary identity. In fact, it is precisely the international situation of being "" and "late-developing" that, while awakening national consciousness, also inspires these nations' world consciousness, and among a group of cultural elites within these nations, gives rise to extremely transcendent worlds, such as Rabindranath Tagore of India, Lu Xun of China, and Milan Kundera of the Czech Republic, etc. These people are often bilingual educated in colonial or semi-colonial environments, have a sensitive understanding of the life-and-death experience of national culture, and possess a relatively broad cultural vision of world culture. Therefore, it is precisely the coexistence, fluctuation, and conflict of national consciousness and world consciousness that constitutes the common survival situation faced by nations, and how to break through the logic of Western nationalism and open up the future of human culture is the cultural and literary issue they need to address together. Therefore, compared to whether or not they reflect the theme of resisting colonial (and post-colonial) rule and whether or not they depict national independence and people's liberation, whether they reflect the coexistence, fluctuation, and conflict of national consciousness and world consciousness, and whether they find a unique way to express this contradiction, paradox, and anxiety, more accurately reflects the filtering function of whether the creativity of foreign literature can be realized under the norms of local culture. Looking back at the process of modernization in 20th-century Chinese literature, although the literary environment has undergone major changes in this century, national consciousness has always had its reason for existence, whether it is to break free from national oppression and strive for national independence, or to build a national state, consolidate national power, and construct national culture. The expression of national consciousness in literature has always been an important spiritual connotation. The problem is that in the relationship between Sino-foreign literature, cultural logic and literary logic are not always unified. The introduction and acceptance of foreign literature cannot ignore the cultural environment and cultural logic, but the logic of literature and aesthetics is also a decisive factor in determining the creativity of foreign literature. If the translation of literature is merely intended to satisfy the cultural emotional needs of the recipients, then such literary translation may overlook the artistic originality of the text and become a mere ideological or cultural event, thus failing to truly provide local literature with new dynamic classic factors. American Marxist literary critic Fredric Jameson summarized the persistent national consciousness of third-world intellectuals in his article Third-World Literature in the Age of Transnational Capitalism as follows: they "persistently hope to return to their own national environment. They repeatedly mention the name of their country, notice the collective pronoun 'we': what should we do, how should we do it, what should we not do, how can we do better than this nation or that nation, we have our own characteristics, in short, we raise the issue to the level of 'the people.'"① However, these issues that American intellectuals feel have been reasonably settled have become a very important form of nationalism in the third world (and also in the main regions of the second world). He also attributes the self-referential mechanism in third-world texts to "national allegory" and argues that this mechanism is different from the self-referential mechanism in Western texts. He uses Hegel's metaphor of the relationship between slaves and slave owners to discuss the relationship between Eastern and Western (strong and nations) and the difference between these two referential mechanisms. Because "only the slave truly understands what reality and resistance are; only the slave can achieve a true 'situation consciousness' of his own situation, because it is his situation consciousness that leads to his punishment. However, the slave owner suffers from an incurable idealism—he extravagantly enjoys a freedom without a fixed position. In that freedom, any awareness of his specific situation is dreamily lost," so, "the allegorical nature of third-world culture, when telling the story of one person and personal experience, ultimately contains a difficult narrative of the experience of the entire collective itself."① Although Jameson reflects on and examines the internal fragmentation and illusion of the Western cultural subject from the perspective of Western culture in the relationship between strong and national cultures, that is, the target of Jameson's critique is a certain blind spot and defect in contemporary Western culture, aimed at solving Western culture's own problems. But there is one point that can remind us that cultures and their expressions, because they are in a suppressed situation, can better experience and express their true situation. According to Hegel, "this slave consciousness is not afraid of this or that disaster in this or that moment, but fears its entire existence. Because it has experienced the fear of death, the fear of the absolute master. The fear of death has permeated his inner soul in his experience, shaken his entire body, and all fixed rules and commands have made him tremble."② "The fear of death" in Hegel's words is mainly a metaphorical expression, but it vividly illustrates the special modern experience contained in national literature, and for the expression and articulation of this special experience, no one can replace it. In the process of modernization of 20th-century Chinese literature, this experience is reflected not only in the creative practice of the Chinese literary subject but also in the process of introducing and accepting foreign literary trends; it is contained in the influence and acceptance activities of Western dominant culture and literature, as well as in the cross-linguistic cultural practice of Chinese cultural subjects introducing national literature, and is particularly concentrated in the process of accepting those national outstanding writers who were introduced into the Chinese world and once inspired great creative inspiration in Chinese modern and contemporary writers. In this sense, focusing on the construction process of the modern consciousness subject of China from the perspective of the introduction and acceptance of national literature in China has its unique significance, at least it can enable us to more comprehensively understand the status and characteristics of Chinese modern literature in the context of world literature, and can better reveal the special connotation of modernity of the Chinese subject. At the same time, examining Chinese literary creation with such a problem awareness can also reveal the consistent efforts of the creative subject in this regard and the specific historical development, thereby establishing higher goals and more effective methods for the study of Sino-foreign literary relations. Therefore, what is called the modernity of Chinese literature is precisely the artistic expression of the special experience of national culture in the difficult and tortuous process of modernization since modern times. And to discover and reveal this special experience connotation and its expression methods in Chinese literature is not only an important goal of modern Chinese literature research and Chinese comparative literature research, but should be even more the key topic of the study of Sino-foreign literary relations as the intersection of the two.