Book Talk Outside the Book

Author: Chen Xingliang
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2004-03-01
Features: This book is the sister volume to Legal Discourse Beyond the Law. Originally, I had planned to include it in Legal Discourse Beyond the Law as well. Mr. Jiang Hao of the Legal Publishing House suggested splitting them into two separate books. After much deliberation, I accepted his advice, and thus this book was born, titled Discourse Beyond Books, to correspond with the title of Legal Discourse Beyond the Law. The preface to the book, included here, is a significant part of the preface I wrote for it. To be precise, the preface to the book does not fit neatly into either a preface to one's own work or a preface to another's work. A preface to one's own work is written for one's own book, while a preface to another's work is written for someone else's book. The preface to the book of an editor-in-chief does not fall into either category. It primarily concerns the positioning of the editor-in-chief's work within academic achievements. It is likely that such a form of editor-in-chief's work did not exist in ancient times. "Literary works are eternal, but the author alone knows the gains and losses," and in such cases, where the work is deeply personal, one would treat it with utmost reverence, cherishing every character as if it were gold. Literary works were almost always the product of a single individual. Of course, ancient times did have positions like chief compiler, such as Ji Xiaolan during the Qianlong era of the Qing Dynasty, who was the chief compiler of the Siku Quanshu. However, the compilation of the Siku Quanshu was not about writing but rather about constructing a web of texts, making the title of chief compiler a perfectly normal official position.
Co-authorship, on the other hand, is a relatively modern phenomenon—one that is neither praised nor condemned uniformly. Of course, genuine collaboration is legally protected. China's Copyright Law Article 13 specifically addresses the copyright of co-authored works, stating in its first clause: "Works co-created by two or more persons shall be jointly owned by the co-authors. Those who have not participated in the creation cannot be considered co-authors." This is because the law recognizes co-authored works as a valid form of intellectual property. Naturally, co-authored articles are unlikely to be deeply personal. Because "when minds are in harmony, words will naturally align" is simply too difficult. The distinction between one's own heart and another's is like the separation between the north and south sides of a mountain. Under such circumstances, for two or more people to write as if they were a single mind is indeed a formidable challenge unless a miracle like "soul connection at a single glance" occurs. I remember a renowned writer saying that they never buy co-authored books, let alone books edited by others. It is said that the China and Foreign Law journal, under the editorial direction of Professor He Weifang, has an unwritten rule not to publish co-authored papers by two or more authors. Thus, in the realm of academic creation, there is a preference for individual over collaborative work. "Individual" refers to independent creation, while "collaborative" refers to co-authorship. However, co-authorship still exists in contemporary academic activities, regardless of one's stance on it. When time is of the essence and energy is limited, "many hands make light work," and collaboration can still produce timely and significant results. Today, academic activities are often named as "projects," advocating the construction of "large ships." A single person's efforts might only allow for the crafting of a small boat, but building a large ship requires the collective effort of many. Therefore, in this academic climate, although I myself do not often buy co-authored or edited books and weigh my purchases carefully, I have still edited some books. Some of these were done voluntarily, and I invested considerable effort in them, while others were requested by publishers and undertaken with some reluctance. I never consider these edited works as my primary academic achievements, for I am fully aware that no enduring classic has ever been the result of editing or co-authorship—it cannot serve as a scholar's representative work. Of course, once one holds the title of editor-in-chief, one is inevitably expected to put in some effort, making it the editor's unavoidable duty to write a preface for the edited book. This is also the only way to leave a personal imprint on what might otherwise be a disorganized collection of works.