Excerpt from Li Zehou's "About Modern Chinese Writers"
I am a die-hard pro-Lu faction, and I have always been this way from junior high school to this day.
Recently, I was particularly pleased to read that some very different people, such as Wu Guanzhong, Zhou Ruchang, Xu Fancheng, Gu Sui, etc., all identify with Lu Xun in different ways and do not agree with Zhou Zuoren and Hu Shi. These people are all 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., and of course Guo Moruo, Mao Dun, Lao She, Ba Jin, etc.
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 higher than Lu Xun. Art appreciation involves the grasp of many factors of aesthetic objects and the comprehensive "judgment", not just the writing skills.
Zhang Ailing's meticulous kung fu in learning "Dream of Red Mansions" is indeed good, but its realm, spirit, aesthetic content, etc., are too far from Lu Xun.
In terms of words, Dostoevsky is probably inferior to Turgenev, but the overall level of literature and art promoted by his ideological strength is far from being comparable to Turgenev. Dostoevsky's greatness lies in his tremendous intellectual and emotional power that interrogates the soul and shocks people's hearts.
01
In the case of Lu Xun, I only like his prose poem "Wild Grass" and some novels, such as "The Lonely" and "In the Restaurant", etc., which I was very shocked to read when I was young. "Morning Flowers and Sunset" is also well written, and I like it too. "Soap", "Divorce" and the like are not good.
His essays have undeniable literary value and are powerful. I don't like his "New Story", I think "New Story" is basically a failure. "Forged Sword" is the best written in "A New Story", and it can be said that it is the only success. It was also written earlier, unlike the others.
I don't like burlesque, including cross talk, in short, it may have something to do with my personality, it's just a personal aesthetic hobby. What impressed me the most was the profound work. The reason why Lu Xun's "The Lonely" shocked me was because it was profound, deeper than "Sadness".
Wei Lianzhen, the protagonist of "The Lonely", turned into a miserable wolf howl in the middle of the night when he woke up from a dream, how lonely, how lonely, and how meaningful.
It was an extremely fiery voice, but it was a very calm pen and ink. The two add up to have this effect.
I don't like Lu Xun's things that are too drastic, those things are quite harsh, such as scolding Mei Lanfang as "syphilis", men love to watch because they are women, and women love to watch because men are pretending, it is indeed harsh, but it is not fair, this is just one example.
Although it is enjoyable to read, it has no long-term significance.
Lu Xun's thoughts and writings that transcend enlightenment and salvation have their long-term significance, and their life insights are profound.
Lu Xun and Bingxin both have a sincere concern for life, but the form of concern is different. It's a pity that Lu Xun was ruined by philistines and politicians.
Lu Xun was raised so high because after the liberation, and only some people revered him before the liberation, but it was not the praise after the liberation.
I don't like Zhou Zuoren, especially because some researchers now hold Zhou Zuoren so high. I was so impressed by so many of Lu Xun's works, but Zhou Zuoren didn't have one. Zhou Zuoren's intellectual prose can't even talk about learning, it's 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 made up of the depth of thought and the strength of the emotion. And no matter how detached, transcendent, and transcendent thoughts and emotions are, they still have their roots in history and reality.
People like to compare Erzhou (Zhou Shuren, Zhou Zuoren), and I don't think so.
02
Among modern Chinese writers, I have always disliked two people, one is Zhou Zuoren, who I just mentioned, and the other is Guo Moruo.
One is too negative, the other is too positive.
I've always hated Guo Moruo and the Creation Society, I never liked the style of yelling, and the shouting of the Creation Society was 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" wants to swallow everything, the sun, the moon, and I don't feel how powerful I feel about the hole. I like some (and just 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 intelligent.
I don't like yelling writers and works, but that doesn't mean I really like works that don't shout at all. For example, Zhou Zuoren, he doesn't call, he quietly sipps tea and talks about dragons and tigers, but I don't like it either.
I've never been a big fan of Lao She. Most of Lao She's works are slippery, and even his most famous "Camel Xiangzi" is not liked, and reading this work makes people discouraged. I remember reading it when I was a teenager, and compared it with Lu Xun, I had an immediate opinion.
I don't deny some of his successful works, the first half of "The Teahouse" was quite successful, and the latter is not good. But I don't like it very much overall. When I read Lu Xun, I always get strength; Reading Lao She, the effect is the opposite. Maybe I'm not a good person, and I always need the strength to replenish myself.
It is strange that the literary world holds Mao Dun's book "Midnight" so high. "Midnight" is a figurative expression of political ideology, which wants to express the latest understanding of Chinese society at that time and the way out of Chinese society, however, once the understanding overwhelms the emotion, the literary nature is weakened.
Mao Dun was dissatisfied with Bingxin, precisely because Bingxin did not have the revolutionary consciousness to transform Chinese society, and only focused on the "universal" soul that transcended ideology. However, if the human soul does not have a good accumulation, can there be a better future?
To be honest, if you want to see Mao Dun's works, you still have to look at his "Frost Leaves Red in February Flowers" and so on. I thought "Shaken" was better than "Midnight", but of course that might be my bias. "Midnight" has some clips that are good, but not good overall.
Ba Jin was enthusiastic, and many young people at that time went to Yan'an and embarked on the road of anti-feudalism, not reading the Communist Manifesto, but reading Ba Jin's works. But his works are more than passionate, not aesthetic, so to speak, lack art form.
03
Qian Zhongshu is a university scholar, and it can even be said that "there is no one before and no one will come after". But there is no need to come. He has read so many books, but only got a lot of fragmentary results, so I said that he bought and returned the pearls, and did not rub out some brilliant pearls, which will shine forever, which is a pity. while
Of course, this is not to deny that he has made important contributions, but I find it incomprehensible to praise him as a god.
The same is true for the novel "The Siege", I don't think the novel "The Siege" is anything remarkable, I really read it hard. He flaunts the little tastes of the United Kingdom, not only does not like it, but also very uncomfortable, which is probably my prejudice again?
There are also very complex social phenomena and human phenomena that are reduced to symbolic characters of two classes to fight to the death. Simple in thought, rough in art.
"The Tempest", despite its roughness, still has the realism of the fragments, while "The Sun Shines on the Sangan River" does not even have the realism of the fragments. But at the time, it might have been able to play a revolutionary role. But Mao himself never read these works, and he looked down on them.
The literature of the 80s was very vibrant and accomplished, and the starting point was much higher than that of the May Fourth era and later.
Contemporary writers are a bit impetuous, eager to succeed, and rarely have the spirit and spirit of facing the wall for ten years, concentrating on construction, not caring about the wind and rain, and just working hard.
Writers should not be too smart, and if they are too smart, they may not become great writers. Too smart, think of everything, think thoroughly, think very thoroughly, finely, have too strong and sober judgment on all kinds of things, so that you will lose those sensual, accidental, unique, and most vivid things in life and thoughts and emotions.
Distorting one's talents to adapt to society, not only to get a name for one's work, but also to live well, and to be famous, but this has to pay a huge price in creation, and writers should create according to their own intuition, "nature", and emotions.
I don't think writers need to read literary theory, but they can read some history, philosophy, etc., and have a keen and unique sense of history or reality, and only by maintaining this feeling can literature be fresh.
The disadvantage of reading literary theory is that in the process of creation, we will consciously or unconsciously use theory to organize feelings, so that the freshness and uniqueness of feelings are lost.
I hope that our writers will be more courageous, not too focused on publication, not eager for quick success, not accommodating temporary policies, and not accommodating various climates. Truly valuable literary works are not afraid of being buried.