Discuss literature

Author: Zhu Guangqian
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-11-01
Features: A classic work explaining literary principles, and an introductory read for those who love and aspire to understand literature. The book presents Zhu Guangqian's personal insights on learning literature, covering everything from literary taste to composition, from content and style to translation techniques, unfolding the layers of literature with examples and allusions. It is profound yet accessible, natural and effortless, guiding readers to enter the realm of literature without realizing it. Reading Zhu's works, "makes us joyfully discover the common ground between our small and great minds."
In Latin, there is a famous saying: "Poets are born, not made." This statement carries an undeniable truth, yet it is often used as an excuse by the lazy. The dull say that literature depends on talent, and since I lack talent, I am naturally (unrelated to literature), even if I work hard, it will be a waste of effort. The clever say that talent is enough for them, and effort is not only unnecessary but also reveals the defect in their talent. The reason poets are considered geniuses is that they achieve extraordinary success without much effort. Both attitudes are widespread and deeply misleading.
The door to literature is actually wide open. The dull mistake it for a tightly closed door and dare not approach it, while the clever mistake themselves for being born inside the door, thinking no exploration is needed. Both are equally lazy and equally shut out. In the past, many superstitions and mystical connotations were attached to the term "genius." The general public believed it was a divine gift, unrelated to human effort. Modern scholars have described it as a mental illness or "long-term endurance." This term is difficult to explain scientifically. I believe it is better to say "aptitude" rather than "genius." Aptitude is innate good judgment and ability, with only differences in degree, not absolute distinctions. Some have more, while others have less. What is called "genius" is merely a natural advantage in aptitude, with nothing magical about it. Shakespeare and I may be worlds apart, but the aptitude I possess is not entirely absent from you and me—only the amount differs. If not, there would be no common ground between him and us in intellect, and we would have no way to understand or appreciate him.
Except for the mentally impaired, everyone can understand and appreciate literature to some extent, meaning they possess the necessary aptitude. Not only appreciation but also creation follows the same principle. Literature is the art of expressing thoughts and emotions through language and words. As long as one has thoughts and emotions and can use language and words, they possess the aptitude for literary creation. In terms of aptitude, everyone is fundamentally capable of pursuing literature; however, aptitude varies, and thus the potential to become a literary figure and achievements in literature also differ.
We cannot excel in everything, but having some ability to appreciate and create literature is better than having none. It is both impossible and unnecessary for everyone to become a great literary figure. It is not only a good ideal but also achievable and should be realized for everyone to appreciate literature and express their thoughts and emotions through language. What one should consider is not whether they should dedicate effort to literature (which is not an issue—someone who cannot appreciate literature or express their thoughts and emotions is clearly not well-educated), but whether they should focus solely on being a literary figure or simply possess the appreciation and expression abilities expected of an educated person. The second question is indeed worth considering.
If one only needs the appreciation and expression abilities expected of an educated person, with reasonable effort, everyone can achieve this, and lack of genius cannot be used as an excuse. But if one aims to be a dedicated literary figure, they must ask themselves whether they have exceptional aptitude for literature. Modern psychologists studying aptitude often distinguish between general intelligence and special intelligence. General intelligence is universally applicable, like a key that can open many locks at once, while special intelligence is effective only for specific objects, like a key that can open only one lock. For example, if a person has high general intelligence, they may excel in reading, managing affairs, fighting, or business compared to the less intelligent. Yet, each of these activities requires a special intelligence. Even if a person excels in everything, if their special intelligence lies in business, their achievements in business will surpass those in other fields.
For a special intelligence in a particular area, we often say that area is "one's natural inclination." If one aims to be a dedicated literary figure, they must have a natural inclination toward literature. If they lack this inclination and force themselves to be a literary figure, success is not entirely impossible, but it is a misuse of their talent. Most who fail are a waste of effort. Many people in the world have chosen the wrong path, lacking a natural inclination for literature but forcing themselves to be literary figures, wasting their potential in other areas—a true pity. The saying "Poets are born, not made" is indeed a wake-up call for such people. But the statement has flaws. Innate aptitude is merely potential; to turn potential into reality, human effort is necessary. Like seeds of flowers and fruits, they are naturally equipped to sprout into trees, bloom, and bear fruit. Yet, many seeds fail to do so without proper cultivation. A seed's ability to sprout, grow, and bear fruit depends heavily on human effort, no matter how superior its natural talent.
The same applies to whether a person's aptitude manifests in academic or professional achievements. Even if one is born with exceptional aptitude for literature, without effort and cultivation, they will be like a seed that sprouts but does not bear fruit. The more outstanding the talent, the deeper the cultivation, the greater the achievement. For example, Li Bai and Du Fu cannot be said to lack talent in poetry, but anyone who has read their collections knows the hard work behind these great poets. Li Bai, with a Daoist foundation in life philosophy, had no trouble simulating styles from the Book of Songs and Chuci to the poetry of the Qi and Liang dynasties. Du Fu's poetry is renowned for its every word having a source. He once described his experience: "Reading ten thousand volumes, writing as if inspired by the gods." Western great poets like Dante, Shakespeare, and Goethe were all products of cultivation. Shakespeare is generally considered more talented than learned, but who can measure the depth of his knowledge? A doctor says only a doctor can write a certain scene of his plays; a lawyer says only someone who has studied law can understand certain terms in his plays. You say he never studied medicine, law, etc.? We marvel at the greatness of his mature works but forget that much of his life was spent adapting and learning from the plays of predecessors. These are just a few examples. In history, there are no examples of poets who were entirely "born" without "making."
Confucius once said, "Some know things from birth, some from learning, and some from struggle. When they know, they are all the same." This statement is indeed profound, but it depends on what "knowing" refers to. If it refers to literature, I believe there are no people who know it from birth, nor those who know it from struggle. Most literary figures possess innate aptitude, combined with the hard work of "struggling to learn." The more innate aptitude one has, the less hard work may be needed. Newton said, "Genius is long-term endurance." This must also be viewed logically. Long-term endurance does not necessarily create genius, but genius relies on it. This applies to all achievements, and literature is just one example. Innate is aptitude, and made is cultivation. Aptitude is potential, like a seed. Cultivation brings potential to reality, making seeds sprout into trees, bloom, and bear fruit. Aptitude is beyond our control, but cultivation depends entirely on our own effort.