“Western Marxism” in Mao’s China

Donald Kuspit's Achievement as an Art Critic During the 1970s

As in the United States, the critical study of Chinese literature in the Soviet Union blossomed and grew in the 'sixties. It was during the early part of this decade that Soviet work on Eastern literature developed its own particular approaches, and scholars began exploring what they saw as the main problems in the field. Prior to the revolution, the methodology used in the study of Chinese literature in Russia was largely philological and descriptive in nature. study of literature was not clearly differentiated in relation to the study of religion, philosophy, and other aspects of the spiritual culture, and oriental literature was not considered in the context of world literature. Several factors helped change this situation by the 'sixties. Some of these were 1) the influential studies and teaching of the scholars M. Alekseev (1881-1951), considered the founder of modem Soviet sinology, and N. I. Konrad (1891-1970), 2) Marxist thought and methodology, and 3) the greater specialization in the field of literature within oriental studies and the growth of oriental studies themselves. In the preface to his study of Ssu-k'ung T'u's poetry, Alekseev defined the aim of his work and the direction he thought the study of Chinese literature should take: The present work has in view to assist a cessation of the amateurish attitude toward the study of Chinese poetry and the replacement of it by a more scientific one. A monograph, exhausting a subject in all its complexity, is that very way by which the contemporary Sinologist must direct himself in order to incorporate the study of the poetry of China into the study, immeasurably more advanced than it, of the poetry of other countries of the East and then into the study of world poetry.' A prominent Soviet scholar of Chinese literature, N. T. Fedorenko, explaining the importance of his work, found most significant for the direction of Soviet studies of Chinese literature his ability to reveal the connection between the movement of artistic creation and social development in China, and the mutual dependence of literary history and the whole course of the material and spiritual culture of the Chinese people.2 Thus, Alekseev's work introduced into the study of Chinese literature the important tasks of incorporating Chinese literature into world literature, applying the same rigorous methods of research to it as to European literatures, and examining literature in relation to social development. N. I. Konrad is another significant figure who influenced the course of the ' M. Alekseev, Kitajskaja poema o poete. Stansy Sykun Tu (A Chinese poem about the poet. Verses of Ssuk'ung T'u), (Petersburg, 1916), p. iii. Translation by Francis Woodman Cleaves in HJAS, 10 (1947), p. 49. 2 N. T. Fedorenko, V. M. Alekseev on the Chinese Poet, Artist, and Calligrapher, Problemy issledovanija

This article intends to bring to light the adventures of Western Marxism in China in the 1980s. It focuses on the philosophical ideas raised and illuminates the views of reformist and orthodox Marxists in the polemic about Western Marxism. I argue that in early 1989 the debate about Western Marxism had escalated into a fundamental challenge to the official ideology—a challenge that came to a sudden halt with the Tiananmen crackdown on 4 June 1989 and the chilling effect this event had on ideological discussion in ChinaThe Third Plenum of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1978 ushered in a decade of ideological fermentation in China that lasted until the Tiananmen crackdown on 4 June 1989. During this period, despite official campaigns against “bourgeois liberalization” and “spiritual pollution,” orthodox Marxism, understood by the CCP as Marxism-Leninism, became less sacrosanct. Discussions on various aspects of Marxism, in particular on “humanism” and “alienation,” captured the limelight in Chinese intellectual circles throughout much of the 1980s. Adhering to (jianchi) and developing (fazhan) Marxism in a new direction became leading themes among Chinese intellectuals.

As a complex network dependent on the communications circuit identified by Robert Darnton and the ever-shifting concentrations of symbolic capital within the field of cultural production,1 journalism must be approached in relational terms with due attention to outliers as well as exemplars. Such an approach is particularly needed for one strand within fin-de-siecle print culture, woman-of-letters journalism. As Linda H. Peterson has demonstrated, the proliferating periodical and newspaper outlets of the nineteenth century played a key material and social role for nineteenth-century women writers. With new opportunities to publish art or literary criticism, column-writing, travel and biographical sketches, and essays, more women than ever before entered the field of journalism, a great many of them earning distinction as women of letters.2 One exemplar, whom Peterson examines at length, was Alice Meynell. Meynell began as a poet whose aspirations to future achievement were embedded in the title of her debut volume of 1875, Preludes. But upon marrying she diverted her energies from poetry to journalism, collaboratively editing a journal with husband Wilfred Meynell and actively writing literary and art criticism, a domestic model pioneered by William and Mary Howitt. And it served Meynell well. Her essays in the Scots (later National) Observer and in the Pall Mall Gazette’s ‘Wares of Autolycus’, according to Peterson, first won critical acclaim for Meynell as a ‘classic’ writer who memorably summoned wisdom amidst the transient backdrop of journalism.

Busca-se aqui investigar a conexão entre duas características definidoras da originalidade crítica de Antonio Candido: sua filiação à linhagem do "marxismo ocidental" e sua inserção numa tradição nacional.

MARXIST SOCIAL THEORY is enjoying an unparalleled influence in the contemporary intellectual life of the West, and its presence in the United States is no exception (Aronowitz 1981:ix). Well developed Marxist perspectives are increasingly evident in the social sciences, historiography, and literary criticism; so it is, perhaps, something of a surprise to discover the relative absence of a parallel discussion in folkloristics. The reasons for this absence and the possibilities for such a Marxist discourse particularly among English-speaking folklorists remain largely unexplored, although Fox has taken an initial step (1980). The present remarks are intended as another but more substantial initiative toward a continuing discussion. A full analysis of Marxist thought and folklore would require a discussion of several key topics: the status of folklore in the writings of Marx and Engels, the development of a Soviet folkloristics, the fate of Marxism in Western folkloristics, and conversely, the place of folklore in the development of Marxism outside the Soviet bloc and among Soviet dissidents. Previous discussions of these subjects have varied in quality and have lent an almost exclusive emphasis to Soviet practice or its rejection in the West (Dorson 1972; Fox 1980; Oinas 1973; Oinas and Soudakoff 1975; Sokolov 1950; Williams 1975; Zemljanova 1963). In a larger study in progress I discuss all of these areas and elaborate my theoretical views on the subject. In this instance, however, I wish to explore the most ignored of these topics-the place of folklore in the development of non-Soviet Marxism, specifically among selected and representative nonfolklorists whom I will generally refer to as Western Marxists. While folklorists have had little to say about Marxism and folklore, this Western Marxist tradition has demonstrated a high degree of interest in this relationship. Their commentary merits discussion both as an important chapter in a developing history of folkloristics (Ben-Amos 1973) and as a necessary background for future theorizing in this area. My chief contention is that the treatment of folklore by Western Marxists has a limited character. They intuitively view folklore as collective behaviors whose fundamental character is in some way inherently opposed to the dominant social order of state capitalism, an unclear formulation at best. Further,

A Study on the Theory of Ethical Literary Criticism

A Cultural Ambassador East and West: J. Hillis Miller’s <i>Lectures in China</i>

The article examines in detail the understanding of culture and cultural practices in the context of such concepts of Chineseized Marxism as "red culture" and "new culture". It was revealed that culture, as well as aesthetic studies, were in the center of attention of Chinese Marxist circles. Accordingly, within the framework of the idea of "new democracy" the formation and further development of a "new culture" is developed, which involves the preservation of traditional priorities of Chinese civilization and the introduction of new aspects that relate both to the Marxist considerations of the leaders of the CCP and in accordance with modern global trends. Based on this, culture and the cultural revolution are inextricably linked with Marxist projects of criticizing capitalist modernity and building an alternative modernity. In this respect, the various practices and plans of Chinese Marxism are similar to those of Western Marxism. It is substantiated that along with the idea of "new culture" the concept of "red culture" functions, which differs from the former in its containing a synthesis of traditional Chinese culture and an understanding of the latter within the framework of Chineseized Marxism. This, according to thinkers and leaders of the CCP, helps in the fight against cultural imperialism disguised as globalization. Chinese aesthetic scholars followed the Western Marxist agenda; but at the same time deliberately criticized Western Marxism and its Maoist connections. It is noteworthy that the Chinese Marxist experience of the post-revolutionary society and the vision that arose from it drew another cognitive map, an alternative "cultural topology" for modern cultural studies. They offer us an epistemological alternative for understanding the genealogy of critical concepts and conceptual schemes through which the history of modern Chinese culture is interpreted. Chineseized Marxism examines these "topological cultural spaces" from a critical perspective, drawing attention to Chinese theories themselves and juxtaposing these theories with Western Marxist ones so that their assumptions can be subjected to critical scrutiny.

The subject of the research is the reception of A.N. Varlamov in Chinese literary criticism. The object of the study is critical articles, literary works devoted to the work of A. Varlamov, and an interview with the author. The novelty of the article is determined by the fact that the works of Chinese researchers are analyzed in order to characterize critical judgments about the work of a modern Russian author, taking into account national specifics. The article highlights the main aspects in the field of studying the work of A. N. Varlamov by Chinese criticism and literary criticism. It is determined that Chinese researchers pay attention to the consideration of religious themes in the writer's prose, and also analyze Varlamov's creative method, defining it as neo-release. The main conclusions of the study are the definition of aspects of the study of religious themes in Varlamov's novels, such as eschatology, the level of morality and religiosity in Russian society, the spiritual salvation and rebirth of man, sectarianism. According to critics, Varlamov's work shows sectarianism as a viral idea of the Russian people, poisoning the collective consciousness and historical memory. The creative method of A. Varlamov is assessed by critics as neo-releaseism, the features of which are marginal heroes, a combination of mysticism and realism, artistic time-space. Chinese literary scholars also note mythological prototypes and folklore elements that are important for Varlamov's works. The main contribution of the author to the study of the topic is that the points of view of Chinese literary scholars and critics are considered, which expand the reception of Varlamov's work in world art, complementing a single receptive field, organizing a dialogue of cultures.

<i>Cultural Capital</i>: Reflections from a Latin Americanist

One of George Snedeker's most notable interventions concerns the necessity of literary criticism for any sociology worth the name. Especially in terms of his commitment to literary criticism, one has the feeling that it's hard to root against Snedeker in a project such as Politics. Considering the various yet ubiquitous ways that literary criticism still today is often met with suspicion, if not outright derision, it is a welcome gesture from Snedeker. Be that as it may, Snedeker's book should hardly be deemed a failure on these grounds. Indeed, his heart really seems to be in his second line of intention, which at once refutes the paradigm of Perry Anderson's 1976 Considerations on Western Marxism, and in the process argues for a reorganization of the definition of "critical theory" to extend and exceed the Frankfurt school.

Whereas sinology, or the study of Chinese literature in English, has often been identifiable by a Chinese culturism, or belief in Chinese civilization as a coherent whole united by its writing system, this review article looks at five books that could be described as participating in a “translational turn” in Chinese literary studies. Yet even as they make powerful arguments against the fundamental unity and cohesiveness of a diachronic Chinese cultural-political identity in their translingual and translational approaches to scholarship, the books—Carla Nappi’s Translating Early Modern China (2021), Haun Saussy’s The Making of Barbarians (2022), Tze-Yin Teo’s If Babel Had A Form (2022), Yunte Huang’s Chinese Whispers (2022), and Nan Z. Da’s Intransitive Encounter (2018)—risk taking for granted the longevity of China’s participation in globalization and its economic integration with the United States. In light of current changes to the relationship between China, the US, and the world order, this review article reads these books while attempting to think through the gains and pitfalls of the translational turn in Chinese literary studies.

Reviewed by: Staging Revolution: Artistry and Aesthetics in Model Beijing Opera During the Cultural Revolution by Xing Fan John B. Weinstein STAGING REVOLUTION: ARTISTRY AND AESTHETICS IN MODEL BEIJING OPERA DURING THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION. By Xing Fan. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2018. xiii + 288 pp. Cloth, US $65.00. Xing Fan begins Staging Revolution: Artistry and Aesthetics in Model Beijing Opera during the Cultural Revolution with a performance anecdote. She recounts the night in 2001 when she saw The Red Lantern, among the most famous of the ten model jingju, performed at the Yisu Grand Theatre in Xi'an. (Though the term jingju has often been translated into English as Peking Opera or Beijing Opera, Fan joins the growing number of scholars who choose to call it jingju.) That night in Xi'an, a packed crowd of over a thousand intently watched the production, at times singing along, at other times discussing with fellow audience members how this night's cast compared with the original cast that had premiered The Red Lantern during the Cultural Revolution, when the ten model jingju were part of the eighteen Model Revolutionary Works (geming yangbanxi) considered exemplary by the Chinese Communist Party of the People's Republic of China. Far from a historical artifact of a time period many would prefer to forget, The Red Lantern was a living, flourishing work of art. The phrase "work of art" is key. Fan's opening anecdote sets the stage for her eventual assertion that these model jingju had, and still have, artistic merit. Raising that assertion to a higher abstraction, Fan writes, "In this context, I argue that literature and art in service of politics are not automatically devoid of literary or artistic merit" (p. 3). Fan's assertion definitely ran contrary to my own previous perceptions of these works; I had subscribed to a not infrequent scholarly view that model jingju were simplistic political works viewers only enjoyed watching because they were required to do so. I sheepishly say this having even co-translated The Red Lantern for a major anthology. Working her way through each element of model jingju—script, acting, music, design, and directing—Fan demonstrates, in extensive detail, how the highly trained and deeply earnest jingju artists created artistic merit in the new model jingju. That is the most significant accomplishment of this book, brought about through extensive archival and interview-based research with the original creators of the works. [End Page 267] In part I, entitled "Jingju, Modern Jingju, and Model Jingju," Fan recounts the development of jingju against a historical and political background roughly spanning 1940 to 1970; each chapter in this part concludes with an extensive example from a selected play. In chapter 1, "Jingju at Yan'an," Fan disputes Mao Zedong's claims that jingju was revolutionized in Yan'an, both because traditional repertory still dominated, and because changes made for newer jingju were in content only, not form. Fan's concluding example, from the 1944 work Driven to Join the Liang Mountain Rebels, illustrates how, without an artistic way to make the masses' viewpoint more central than the classic hero's, there was no revolution in form to match the revolution in content. Chapter 2, "Jingju during the Xiqu Reform," recounts challenges of reforming xiqu (the larger genre encompassing jingju among other regional forms) in the early years of the PRC, a time period marked by discussions of whether modern lives could be presented through jingju's signature style. Ma Yanxiang advocated for comprehensive reform of each element, and the chapter concludes with Fan's analysis of Ma's many innovations in script, performance, and music when directing Three Mountains, which premiered in 1956. Chapter 3, "Modern Jingju in Years of Uncertainty," looks at the period from 1956 to 1963, a time period of great political instability and vacillation. By 1963, the debate over whether it was possible to portray modern life through jingju was over, and focus shifted to how to make it happen artistically, with music, singing, and speech all contested areas. The chapter concludes by analyzing the artistic choices made in developing The White-Haired Girl to portray modern characters convincingly while...

The People is a primary concept of the Chinese form and is simultaneously the starting point and the destination of it. Inheriting historical materialism’s discourse, the concept of people in the Chinese form acquires a novel quality. “The people become a revolutionary aggregation of classes with broad common interests and an association based on but also transcend class,” and the people are all millions of real individuals. The people are the creators of history. Instead of regarding the masses or citizens mainly as the objects of salvation as Western Marxists, the Chinese form adheres to the subjectivity of the people and recognizes the people as the masters of the society. “The priority of people” is the prominent feature of the Chinese form. The relationship between literature and the people constitutes the cornerstone of the Chinese form. The Chinese form concludes and presents creative theoretical views on problems such as whom literature should serve and how to serve, and such clear and systematic inquiry is unprecedented in the history of Marxist literary criticism studies. Today, the relationship between literature and the people needs reconsideration and expansion. Interacting and mutual shaping with each other, the people and literature/art will open a new era.