University Literature Reader

Author: Qian Liqun, Li Qingxi, Guo Yuangbao
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-01-01
Features: Contemporary college students read so many books every day, and a large portion of them—especially the high-flown lectures and endless theories—are not particularly brilliant, while the great, rich, sensitive, and beautiful literary classics produced by the human spirit 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 thing itself." 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 in the American "academic system," which Marcus Cunliffe, the author of A History of American Literature, described as bringing infinite misfortune to literature, there were scholars like Susan Sontag who stood up to "oppose interpretation," and Edward W. Said who 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 carefree amateurs. The renowned Italian semiotician Umberto Eco 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 right of the interpreter has been emphasized a bit too much," leading to "overinterpretation."
Recently, scholars have traced the tradition of "literature resisting philosophy" from Plato to Derrida, simply aiming to secure the relative independence of literature within the advancing humanities and emphasizing 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 within the ever-expanding field of modern humanities. Outside the literary world, master scholars or thinkers have continuously highlighted their literary insights in their own research, even basing their professional studies on a literary foundation. Walter Benjamin invented a unique metaphorical poetics and historical research through his close reading of Baudelaire; Roland Barthes deepened his narrative theory by meticulously reading Balzac's novella Sarrasine in S/Z; Bakhtin constructed his dialogue philosophy through his close reading of Dostoevsky's novels; Wolfgang Iser concretized his theory of the "implied author" through a detailed analysis of Thackeray's Vanity Fair; Isaiah Berlin reinterpreted the famous quote by the Greek poet Archilochus, "The fox knows many tricks, but the hedgehog knows one," through his deep contemplation of a series of Russian and Western literary figures, thereby completing his typical analysis of the intellectual qualities of scholars; Heidegger, in his later years, 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 illustrate 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, which included masters like Hayek, required doctoral candidates to spend two years studying "raw materials" representing the essence of Western intellectual culture under the guidance of the "committees," 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 fusion of Western philosophy and literature is not a phenomenon that began 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 mere theoretical thought 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 believed that the division between scientists and literary scholars was one of the great losses of contemporary humanity. He affirmed the importance of literary cultivation and literary wisdom from another perspective. Compared to university Chinese, universities need to be 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 Chinese with that of literature. College students should engage with literary classics." However, Guo Yuangbao, one of the editors, disagrees with the term "replacement." He argues that University Chinese itself is being improved, and some of its ideas already align with the concept of University Literature they advocate, though it has not yet been consciously and fully articulated as such. Moreover, he believes that for a Chinese person, familiarity with their mother tongue is a lifelong pursuit, and this literary education cannot replace it. He also appreciates the approach of University Humanities Readings, as students can always read these articles later, even if they don't finish them during their four years of university. At least, they become aware of the existence 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 think this is a trend. Because 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: "Ancient Chinese Literature," "Modern Chinese Literature," "Contemporary Chinese Literature," and "Foreign Literature," with the clear goal of improving college students' literary cultivation.