Lin Yutang
Lin Yutang also often uses unexpected comparisons to show his unique insights, for example, he said, "Generally speaking, the poor people in rural China live more spaciously than university professors in New York." Such comparisons certainly make perfect sense, but note that Lin is more concerned with educating and entertaining his readers than arguing with them or belittling them. My Country and Our People (only in the commentary) mentions the character of the Chinese, mentioning Smith's observation of Chinese: Chinese lives "roughly", living in "pain and torment" every day, and their "clothing, houses, pillows, and sleeping beds" are not comfortable.
Lin explains that he knows That European readers will find Smith's "masterpiece" "interesting" to read, but he can bet that Chinese readers will find it "ten times more interesting" when they learn of "the torture and discomfort that Smith described." According to Lin's interpretation, Smith's experience in China seems to prove with certainty: "The spirit of the white man is degenerate and corrupt." "This comparison is once again thought-provoking.
Instead of making excuses for China's living conditions, Lin used the "admissibility" to reverse the conversation: Lin described the home as "a combination of electric bells, electric keys, wardrobes, rubber mats, keyholes, wires, and alarm bells", and pointed out that "the Western concept of happiness is to live in an overheated apartment with overheated heating, plus a radio". If one really had to be happy with a radio, then "before 1850 no one in the world was happy, and there should be more happy people in America than in 'idyllic' Bavaria, where there are not even a few barber chairs that can be folded and rotated."
Lin's discourse uses both analogue and illogical inference (the method of disproof). This example can also illustrate another intersection of Lin and Burke. In Permanence and Change, Burke discusses several different ways in which humans rationalize the world around them, arguing that the rationalization model of [his] era was "technological confusion." Burke argues that technology puts people in colored glasses that explain what's around them, filtering people's minds, leading to cultural blind spots. Burke did not specify which kind of technology it was, because he only focused on the social mentality of treating technology; Lin used the same approach, and he discussed issues such as "industrialization" in many places in his book "My Country and My People" that make people "see" and "not see". We can say that according to Lin's diagnosis, there is a widespread "scientific and technological confusion" when people talk about Sino-Western relations.
Lin uses a special technology (electric barber chair) as an example to bring out an "asymmetrical perspective" – an example to illustrate what is considered comfortable and convenient.
This provocative tone plays an important role in the Lin Yutang style. He makes full use of the vague meaning of the word "spirit" to beat the "spirit of the white man" and give the reader a slap in the face. To say that their "spirits" are "degenerate and corrupt" is to say that they are not only physically weak, but also weak in willpower, which is both ironic and vague, and makes the reader inevitably question what Lin means by these words. This rhetorical approach not only draws the reader's attention to the instability of the text and the vagaries of its meaning, but also reveals another trick of Lin's: his attitude is difficult to determine, because there are praises and demeans, and even often in the same sentence. It's not that Lin can't make up his mind, but that he's using a few hands of detachment that the humorists he admires are used to. Such rhetorical positioning leaves him considerable room.
For example, he mentions that Smith's book, which began as a discussion of the comfort and convenience of modern civilization, changed to a commentary on relative materialism. The image of the happy and welcoming Westerner with a radio at home is ironic, because it contrasts with the image of another rustic Westerner living in a cabin in the Bavarian Forest in Germany, who is even more admirable because of his remoteness from the troubles of modern society.
It is really not easy to appreciate the results achieved by Lin Yutang's practice. He uses a realistic attitude to expose a certain cultural conflict and dismantle the presuppositions of culture, but he is able to neither divide nor anger the reader. In the case of Lin's comments on Chinese comfort and convenience, some readers will feel that the conflict he exposes doesn't matter, because they may not be aware of the conflict at all; even if they did, they wouldn't think that there was anything wrong with their view of "comfort and convenience." However, the stone of his mountain can attack jade, and after reading Lin's works, a thoughtful reader will have two thoughts, enough to wake them up from the "confusion of scientific and technological thinking": the first idea is, "To measure the culture of a person by pressing the button several times a day, presumably... The second idea is that "the myth of the so-called Chinese content with the status quo is actually created by Westerners."
Lin Yutang has said elsewhere that his attitude toward Writing China is "warm and emotional, half witty, half ridiculous, and a little idealistic and spontaneously amused," and this is true from today's perspective.
We can see this attitude when he discusses China's national character. For example, he said: "Compared with the patience of Chinese, which is as unique as Chinese blue and white porcelain, the so-called patience of Christianity can be said to be acute." Lin also joked: "Tourists from all over the world may wish to bring home Chinese blue and white porcelain while also bringing back some Chinese patience." Lin applied the strict dichotomy (strong-weak) to abstract discussions of national nature, and did not forget to ridicule it (comparing "patience" to "acute" [petulance], and comparing Christian patience to Chinese porcelain porcelain, using words that rhyme in English). This technique allows Lin to close the distance with the reader, rather than making the reader feel different and unfamiliar.
In his book Interlingual Practice, Liu He examines how people "establish and maintain 'hypothetical equivalence' between words and meanings" by ignoring linguistic and cultural differences. Given that the word "modeng" in early twentieth-century China was transliterated from the English word "modern," Liu He argues that the West actually defines what modern Chinese literature is. Liu He points out that when comparative theories are based on essential categories such as 'self' or 'individual', they transcend the history of translation, are imposed on another culture, and occupy discursive priority, so that we encounter 'serious methodological problems'". Lin Yutang recognized and practiced the concept of "interlingual practice" proposed by Liu He sixty years later, providing "the possibility of rethinking cross-cultural interpretation and the form of language mediation between The East and the West".
In the 1920s and 1930s, Lin Yutang wanted to promote humor to resolve social conflicts, such as the struggle between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, the conflict between the old and the new. Decades later, Burke's point of view in Motivational Rhetoric coincided with that of Lin Yutang: the effort to identify with the other would also have the effect of treating the other as an unego, and the only way to resolve this tension was to "continuously use rhetoric." As the postwar international landscape changed and globalization made the world more connected, Burke warned that the more efforts to identify with the other, "the greater the impulse to divide and the wider the scope of human conflict." Overcoming "this ironic combination of identity and division" and thus "others who are very different from their own situations" requires "the rhetorical means of the writer, and it is backed by humanistic and poetic imagery." Of course, Burke also clearly understands that "instead of trying to identify with the other, international competitors are competing... Contrary to the way". And he also notes that when a "harsh scientific idea" is "applied to a social structure that is not ready to accept it," it must be counterproductive.
Modern China is full of wastes and contradictions in society, and the tension discussed in Burke's writing has long been reflected in many aspects of modern China. Lin Yutang wrote in World War II that our world cannot use humor as a necessary tonic, because even "the ideal world of mankind will not be perfect, there will be many flaws and controversies, as long as it can be rationally resolved, it is our ideal world." He believes that "astute common sense" and the "simple thinking" needed to comprehend humor can help "change our mindset" and can also change "the quality of our entire cultural life."
Lin's so-called humorous attitude is similar to the ambiguity expressed in comics — "This two-way attribute is basically derived from the concept of comics, which is exactly what society needs, and the one-way criticism mode is lacking." Burke's so-called "ambiguity" in The Attitude Toward History can compromise the "bumps" between opposing views, thus providing an effective method of social criticism.
Kenneth Burke
After all, "there can be no dialogue without ambiguity, and without dialogue there can be no process of confrontation, identity, and assimilation."
It stands to reason that we should be able to use Lin's rhetorical style today as a technique of the dialogue process described by Burke, so that it is not necessary to turn differences into similarities, but at least to find a new way out of the differences that can be agreed with and effective. But we must not forget that Lin is fluent in both Chinese and English, and his rhetorical skills cannot be easily abstracted from his life experience. Lin Shi understands that there are some things in the world that cannot be clearly explained by "truth", and how to say that it is a national issue of a country. Sound dialogue seems to be the only hope for turning antagonism into cooperation, and this is especially valuable to us today. Lin doesn't try to persuade readers to take his point of view, but he does try to slow down the conversation and encourage others to torture their own point of view. Comparing the use of synonyms in different languages is a process of trying to avoid imposing one interpretation on another. Lim's writings in both English and Chinese are prolific, and they focus on a large readership, not just academics, which is further evidence of Lim's attempt to keep the dialogue going.
Lin Yutang is a giant of the world literary world, a big name, his voice is still closely related to the world today, but strangely, not many people in the academic community have noticed him, and it is obviously not easy to find a suitable position for Lin shi in the academy or a like-minded person with him. Burke lived in the same era as him, and is not his confidant, although we can guess that Burke should have heard of this writer from China, because his first three books were sold all over the world; likewise, we doubt that Lin would have the patience to read any of Burke's works. It may seem strange to put two strangers on the same bed, but they both understand that language is part of reality, and the two are interdependent. They also all see literature as an "instrument of life" and explore the connection between language and human behavior. There is actually a lot of intersection between these two very different literati, and those who study Kenneth Burke's theory should also read Lin Yutang's works to better understand Burke's theory, and perhaps rewrite the history of rhetorical thought in the twentieth century.
At least for now, Lin does not see a framework of traditional knowledge divided by time and topic, but when we explore how Lim challenged the dualistic opposition of his time, we may find a beginning of cross-cultural discourse in his writings, thus finding a new place for Lin Yutang in the academy. Indeed, he invites the reader to examine his own understanding rather than imposing opinions on the reader, which is worth emulating today.
Today, we live in an era of globalization, where a lot of information comes flooding in and self-identity is blurred, but border conflicts have not stopped, and the distance between "us" and "them" has not narrowed, but has become more distant. Perhaps now we can appreciate Lin Yutang's views more.
This article is excerpted from