Your own garden

Author: Zhou Zuoren
Publisher:
Publication Date: 2002-01-01
Features: One hundred and fifty years ago, Voltaire wrote a novel titled Candide, depicting the sufferings of humanity and mocking the optimistic philosophy of Dr. Pangloss. Candide and his teacher Dr. Pangloss endured many hardships before finally settling in a corner of Turkey, living by farming the land, and achieving peace. Candide concluded his unwavering optimism by saying, "These are all good, but we would do better to cultivate our own gardens." This maxim is now well-known and its meaning is clear, requiring no further footnotes from me. However, I have quoted it here with a different significance. The so-called "own garden" is originally very broad and not limited to any one type: whether it is growing fruits and vegetables, medicinal herbs, or even violets and forget-me-nots, as long as it is done in accordance with personal awareness and with effort on the ground one has chosen, regardless of its size, it is fulfilling one's duty. Among these ordinary words, what I wish to specially emphasize is that growing violets and forget-me-nots is also cultivating our own gardens, just like growing fruits, vegetables, and medicinal herbs, though of different kinds, they hold the same value. Our own gardens are literature and art, and this must be declared first. I am not disdainful of other activities or unwilling to engage in them—I generally acknowledge that all forms of activity are necessary for life. However, it is partly due to a lack of such talent and mostly due to a lack of such interest that I have had to make this choice. But I do not regret this choice and am not ashamed of its small scale or its seemingly weak and useless output. To cultivate violets and forget-me-nots according to one's own inclinations is the proper way to respect individuality. Even if, as others say, each person truly owes a debt to society, I believe I have repaid it, because society not only needs fruits, vegetables, and medicinal herbs but also urgently needs violets and forget-me-nots as well—if a society looks down upon these, it is a foolish society, one that has only a physical existence without a spiritual life, and there is no need for us to pay attention to it. If, under any pretext, people are forced to sacrifice their individuality to serve such a foolish society—masquerading as "meeting social psychology"—that is simply as unreasonable as forcing people to be loyal to the ruler under the name of morality or forcing them to wage war under the name of the nation. Some have said that according to what you have said, the art you advocate must be life-oriented art. I have no objection to the general term "life-oriented art," but the common understanding of "life-oriented art" is the advocacy of "art for life." I have some opinions on this. "Art for art" separates art from life and makes life subservient to art. As for Oscar Wilde's promotion of the "artification of life," it is certainly not entirely appropriate. "Art for life," which makes art subservient to life and treats art as a tool for improving life rather than its ultimate goal, also separates art from life. I believe that art is inherently part of life, as it is an expression of our emotional lives—how can it be separated from life? "For life"—it is true that art serves life by providing practical benefits, but this is not its only function. In short, art is independent yet fundamentally human, so it need not be isolated from life nor made subservient to it; it should simply be allowed to become a harmonious art that is part of life. The "art for art" school treats the individual as a craftsman of art, while the "art for life" school treats art as a servant of life. Now, however, the individual is the master, expressing emotions to become art, which is also a part of their life, not created for the benefit of others. When others encounter this art, they resonate with it and find inspiration, enriching and deepening their spiritual lives, which in turn becomes the foundation of real life. This is the essence of life-oriented art: it possesses both independent artistic beauty and intangible benefits. The cultivation of violets and forget-me-nots, as I have described it, is precisely like this. Some people grow flowers for leisure, others grow them to sell, and those who truly grow flowers make it their life—but flowers are never unbeautiful, nor are they ever without benefit to people.