Born in 1930 in Ningxiang, Hunan, Li Zehou graduated from the Department of Philosophy of Peking University in 1954. In the "aesthetic fever" of the 1980s, Li Zehou was revered as a "spiritual teacher" by young people and was extremely influential in the intellectual circles. Li Zehou is a researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, an academician of the International Academy of Philosophy in Paris, an honorary doctor of humanities at the Colorado College in the United States, a visiting professor at the University of Tübingen in Germany, the University of Michigan in the United States, the University of Wisconsin and other universities, mainly engaged in the history of modern Chinese thought and philosophy and aesthetic research, and his representative works include "The History of Modern Chinese Thought", "Aesthetic Theory Collection", "The Course of Beauty", "Criticism of Critical Philosophy" and so on.
About modern Chinese writers
I was a stubborn quite rude person, from junior high school to today, always. Recently, I was particularly pleased to read that some very different people, such as Wu Guanzhong, Zhou Ruchang, Xu Fancheng, Gu Sui, etc., all identified with Lu Xun in different ways but not with Zhou Zuoren and Hu Shi. These people are serious artists and scholars, not left-wing writers and radicals, but they all admire Lu Xun, who not only has good ideas and good character, but also has the best articles.
I admire Lu Xun and feel that he is far superior to other writers, including Zhang Ailing, Shen Congwen, etc., of course, Guo Moruo, Mao Dun, Lao She, Ba Jin and so on can not be compared. Lu Xun has a huge depth of thought that others do not have, and he uses the unique style he has created to turn his thoughts into emotions and burst out, which is indeed extraordinary. It is ridiculous to say that Zhang Ailing is taller than Lu Xun. Art appreciation involves the grasp of many factors of aesthetic objects and comprehensive "judgment", and cannot only look at textual skills. Zhang Ailing's meticulous kung fu of learning "Dream of the Red Chamber" is indeed good, but its realm, spirit, aesthetic content, etc., are too far away from Lu Xun. Dostoevsky is probably inferior to Turgenev, but the overall level of literature and art promoted by the intensity of his ideas is far from being comparable to Turgenev. Dostoevsky's greatness lies in his enormous intellectual and emotional power that interrogates the soul and shakes the human heart.
As far as Lu Xun is concerned, I also only like his prose poem "Weeds" and some novels, such as "The Lonely One", "On the Restaurant", etc., and I was very shocked to read it when I was young. "Chao Hua Xi Shi" is also well written and liked. "Soap", "Divorce" and so on will not work. His essays have undeniable literary value, and they are very powerful. I don't like his "New Story Compilation", I think "Story New Compilation" is basically a failure. "Cast Sword" is the best written in the "New Story Compilation", and it can be said that it is the only success. It was also written earlier, unlike the other essays.
I don't like burlesque, including crosstalk, in short, it may have something to do with my personality, just my personal aesthetic hobby. What impressed me the most was the profound work. The reason why Lu Xun's "The Lonely One" shocked me was because it was profound, deeper than "Wounded Death". The protagonist of "The Lonely Man", Wei Lianzhen, who has nowhere to go after waking up from a dream, turns into a miserable wolf howl in the middle of the night, which makes people feel shocked, how lonely, how lonely, and how meaningful, it is an extremely hot voice, but it is a very calm pen and ink. Add the two together to have this effect.
I don't like Lu Xun's things that are too drastic, those things are quite harsh, such as calling Mei Lanfang "syphilis", men love to look because they play women, women love to look because men play, it is indeed harsh, but unfair, this is just one case. Although it is very enjoyable to read, it does not have a long-term meaning. Lu Xun's thoughts and words that transcend enlightenment and salvation have their long-term significance, and his life perception is profound. Both Lu Xun and Bing Xin have a sincere concern for life, but the forms of concern are different. It is a pity that Lu Xun was praised by philistines and politicians. Lu Xun was raised so high because after liberation, before liberation only some people revered him, but not after liberation.
I don't like Zhou Zuoren, especially disgusted by some researchers who hold Zhou Zuoren so high. I was so impressed by so many of Lu Xun's works, but none of Zhou Zuoren's. Zhou Zuoren's intellectual prose, even learning, is just "elegant". I don't like Zhou Zuoren, in the final analysis, I still don't like his overall creative realm is too old, and he has put a lot of effort into it, but the realm is not far from the works of the late Ming Dynasty. The realm is composed of the depth of thought and the strength of the emotion. And thoughts and emotions, how detached, transcendent, and transcendent, always have their historical and practical roots. People like to compare the two weeks (Zhou Shuren, Zhou Zuoren), and I don't think so.
Among modern Chinese writers, I have always disliked two people, one is Zhou Zuoren, who just said, and the other is Guo Moruo. One is too negative, one is too positive. I have always hated Guo Moruo and the Creation Society, I have never liked the style of shouting, and the shouting of the Creation Society is both rude and empty. The shouts of "Goddess" are still in harmony with the shouts of that era, but I still don't like it. His "tengu" was going to engulf everything, to engulf the sun, to engulf the moon, and I felt that the space hole did not feel how powerful it was. I like some (and only some) of Guo's historical works, such as some articles in the Bronze Age and some oracle bone research, and I can see that he is indeed very clever. I don't like shouting writers and works, but that doesn't mean I really like works that don't shout at all. For example, Zhou Zuoren, he did not call, very quietly tasted tea and talked about the dragon and the tiger, but I also did not like it.
I've never liked Lao She a lot. Most of Lao She's works are slippery, and even his most famous "Camel Xiangzi" does not like it, and after watching this work, people are discouraged and lazy. I remember reading it as a teenager, compared with Lu Xun. I don't deny some of his successful works, the first half of "The Tea house" is quite successful, and the latter is not. But overall I don't like it very much. I noticed Hu Feng's criticism of Lao She very early on, and Hu Feng did not like Lao She at all. When I read Lu Xun, I always get strength; when I read Lao She, the effect is the opposite. Maybe I can't be a person, and I always need to have the strength to replenish myself.
It is strange that the literary circles hold Mao Dun's book "Midnight" so high. "Midnight" is an image expression of political ideology, which wants to express the latest understanding of Chinese society at that time and the way out of Chinese society, but once the understanding overwhelms emotion, the literary nature is weakened. Mao Dun was dissatisfied with Bingxin, and it was precisely because he was dissatisfied with Bingxin's lack of revolutionary consciousness that had transformed Chinese society, and only focused on the "universal" mind that transcended ideology. However, if the human soul does not have a good accumulation, can there be a good future? To be honest, to see Mao Dun's works is still to see his "Frost Leaves Red in February Flowers" and so on. I thought Shake was better than Midnight, but of course that was probably my bias. There are some clips in Midnight that are good, but not overall.
Ba Jin was enthusiastic, and many young people at that time went to Yan'an and embarked on the anti-feudal road, not reading the Communist Manifesto, but reading Ba Jin's works. But his works are more than enthusiastic, the sense of beauty is insufficient, and it can be said that there is a lack of art forms.
Qian Zhongshu is a university inquirer, and it can even be said that "there is no ancient person before, and there is no one who comes after". But there is no need for anyone to come. He read so many books, but only got a lot of bits and pieces, so I said that he bought the pearls and did not rub out some brilliant pearls, which will shine forever, which is a pity. Of course, this is not to deny that he made important contributions, but it seems incomprehensible to exalt him like a god. The same is true for the novel "Siege", I think the novel "Siege" is nothing remarkable, I really read it hard. He showed off the little fun of the British, not only did he not like it, but he was also very uncomfortable, which was probably my prejudice again?!
There is also the character who reduces very complex social phenomena and human phenomena to the symbolic form of two classes fighting to the death. The idea is simple, the art is rough. "The Tempest" is rough and has the realism of the clip, while "The Sun Shines on the Sangan River" does not even have the realism of the clip. But at that time it may have played a revolutionary role.
The literature of the eighties was very vibrant and accomplished, and the starting point was much higher than that of the May Fourth era and beyond. Contemporary writers are a bit impetuous, eager to succeed, rarely face the wall for ten years, concentrate on the construction, do not ask how the wind and rain are, just the spirit and spirit of continuous cultivation. Writers must not be too clever, and too smart may not make them great writers. Too clever, thinking about everything, thinking thoroughly, thinking very thoroughly, finely, having too strong and sober judgment on various things, so that it will lose those emotional, accidental, unique, and most vivid and lively things in life and thoughts and emotions. Distorting one's own talents to adapt to society, both to get the name of the work, but also to live a good life, to be famous and advantageous, but this has to pay a huge price in creation, and writers should create according to their own intuition, "nature", and emotions.
I think writers don't have to read literary theory, but they can read some history, philosophy, etc., and have a keen and unique feeling about history or reality. The disadvantage of reading literary theory is that in the creation, the theory will be used consciously or unconsciously to sort out the feelings, so that the freshness and uniqueness of the feelings are lost. I hope that our writers will have a greater boldness, not to focus too much on publication, not to rush to make quick profits, not to accommodate temporary policies, not to accommodate various climates. Truly valuable works of literature are not afraid of being buried.
——Excerpted from "Comments on Modern Chinese Writers", "The Conflict between Ideas and Love", "Aesthetic Dialogues with Liu Zaifu", "Standing on the Earth After Wandering Without Land", "Studying the May Fourth New Culture", "Floating Life Theory"
Push Buy Buy Buy