University Literature

Author: Qian Liqun
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-01-01
Features: Contemporary college students read so many books every day, and a large portion of them—especially those high-flown lectures and ever-emerging theories—are not particularly brilliant, while literary classics born from the great, rich, sensitive, and beautiful human minds are often pushed aside. This is truly unfortunate. The three of us, without fully realizing our limitations, have vowed to compile a University Literature for college students to resist the endless flood of non-literary works that they are often forced to read but could easily do without.
Long ago, some scholars stood up from a literary perspective to protest the arrogant wisdom that claims authority over literary works. French writer Marcel Proust said, "Only by freeing oneself from intellect can one truly grasp things in the impressions we receive, that is, truly reach the things themselves." He wrote Against Sainte-Beuve to strip the laurel wreath stolen by intellect and return it to literature. The "deconstruction" movement in contemporary French theory, led by figures like Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida, followed in the footsteps of this literary predecessor in a certain sense. Even within the American "academic system," which Marcus Cunliffe, author of A History of American Literature, described as bringing endless misfortune to literature, scholars like Susan Sontag stood up to "oppose interpretation," and Edward W. Said proposed making literary studies a "flywheel" of "objectivity and fairness" in the American academic system. He even advocated that literary scholars should abandon their professional habits and become "amateur" enthusiasts. Umberto Eco, the renowned Italian semiotician, hoped to establish a "dialectical relationship between the power of the text and the power of the interpreter," insisting that interpretation must be constrained by the "text." "In recent decades of literary studies, the rights of the interpreter have been emphasized a bit too much," he noted, leading to "overinterpretation."
Recently, scholars have traced the tradition of "literature resisting philosophy" from Plato to Derrida, aiming to secure the relative independence of literary studies and emphasize the importance of straightforward reading of literary originals. Western humanistic education has always been tied to a robust sensory nerve. Whether it was T.S. Eliot's emphasis on the role of classical literary cultivation in modern education or the "New Criticism" movement's practice of "close reading" of literary works, both insisted on preserving a place for literary teaching in the ever-expanding field of modern humanistic studies. Outside the literary world, master scholars and thinkers have continuously highlighted their understanding of literature in their own research, even grounding their professional studies on a literary foundation. Walter Benjamin, through his close reading of Baudelaire, developed a unique metaphorical poetics and historical research methodology. Roland Barthes deepened his narrative theory by meticulously reading Balzac's novella Sarrasine in S/Z. Mikhail Bakhtin constructed his dialogue philosophy through his close reading of Dostoevsky's novels. Wolgang Iser concretized his theory of the "implied author" through an intricate analysis of Henry James's The Portrait of a Lady. Isaiah Berlin reinterpreted the famous quote by the Greek poet Archilochus, "The fox knows many tricks, but the hedgehog knows one," through his profound reflections on a series of Russian and Western literary figures, thereby completing his typical analysis of the intellectual qualities of scholars. In his later years, Heidegger immersed himself in the poems of Rilke, Trakl, and H?lderlin, striving to break free from the constraints of philosophical discourse and turning to "language in poetry" to exemplify his idea of the "end of philosophy and the beginning of thinking." According to Professor Lin Yusheng's recollection, the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago in the early 1960s, including scholars like Hayek, required doctoral candidates to spend two years studying "raw materials" representing the essence of Western intellectual and cultural thought under the guidance of the committee members before taking the qualifying exams, with literary classics occupying a significant portion.
The American philosopher Richard Rorty once exclaimed that contemporary Western philosophy had transformed into literary criticism. In fact, the integration of Western philosophy and literature did not begin only in the latter half of the 20th century. As the torch of the human spirit, literature has always been the treasure trove of true thinkers, whether openly or secretly. True thinkers never treat literature with mere "borrowing" or "exploitation" but regard it as a higher form of "thinking" than purely theoretical or academic research. It is precisely because of the exceptional literary readings by countless master figures that academia (including science) has not dared to "colonize" literature recklessly. In his lecture titled Two Cultures, the British scientist and novelist C.P. Snow even argued that the split between scientific and literary intellectuals was a great loss for modern humanity. From another perspective, he affirmed the importance of literary cultivation and literary wisdom. Compared to university Chinese, universities need to stay closer to the origins of literature. The university literature concept advocated in this book has already resonated with the academic community. Mao Jian, a film critic teaching at East China Normal University in Shanghai, said she has recommended this series to her students, "because the concept of this book is excellent—it replaces the concept of language with that of literature. College students should engage with literary classics." However, one of the editors, Qiao Yuangao, disagrees with the term "replacement." He argues that University Chinese itself is being improved, and some of its ideas align with the concept of University Literature they advocate, though it has not yet been consciously and fully articulated. Moreover, he believes that for Chinese people, familiarity with their mother tongue is a lifelong endeavor, and this literary education cannot be replaced. He also appreciates the approach of University Humanities Reader, noting that even if students don’t finish reading all the articles during their four years of university, they can still read them later. At least, they become aware of so many excellent works!"
Editor Liu Jinglin describes this series as taking a "third path." "Currently, University Chinese still holds a dominant position in universities, and we cannot expect students to immediately switch to reading this series. Our first step is to get it included in public elective courses. But I believe this is a trend. I know that Chen Sihe at Fudan University is also working on original reading."
This book is compiled as a reform of University Chinese. It is centered around "literary classics" and divided into four sections: "Chinese Ancient Literature," "Chinese Modern Literature," "Chinese Contemporary Literature," and "Foreign Literature," with the clear goal of improving college students' literary cultivation.