First of all, innovation must choose the old ── Notes on Takeism (Xu Zhongyu)
( 1)
Lu Xun's article "Takeism" was written on1June 4, 934. The critical inheritance of literary heritage is an important issue that Lu Xun has been paying close attention to. His views first focused on criticizing some die-hards for touting "national quintessence", and then criticized the argument of blindly worshipping foreign things and obsessing foreign things. At that time, his criticism was directed at the two extremes of complete inheritance theory and complete negation theory. Of course, these two extremes are wrong. It is entirely possible to oppose these two extremes. It is possible to explore the correct path under the guidance of dialectical materialism and historical materialism. However, due to the lack of "calm, brave, discerning and selfless" spirit, attitude and ability, many people are hesitant and even afraid to touch and choose literary heritage. Among them, there are also some progressive figures who advocate and demand innovation. In their view, new culture and new literature can not be created by taking something from literary heritage, as if innovation and inheritance have nothing to do, let alone an inevitable relationship. It is in view of this new situation and new problems that I wrote this article "Takeism" with irresistible passion. Although the basic ideas in this article are also expressed in other articles before and after his writing, they are not as concentrated, comprehensive and vivid as this article. In order to understand his articles in more detail, it is necessary for us to refer to some of his other articles. However, this article is indeed the most important and profound one that he discusses the critical inheritance of literary heritage. Although half a century has passed, I still feel fresh and full of scientific value and revolutionary spirit when I read it today. Because for half a century, people he accused of being "losers", denounced as "idiots" and despised as "waste" still appear constantly in this battle sketch.
He accused those who were afraid to contact and choose as "women's wives".
He denounced the total deniers and the guy who wanted to set fire to his legacy as "stupid".
He despised the general inheritors and opium addicts who sucked the rest into "waste".
He advocated: "First of all, regardless of the willy-nilly,' bring it'!" After bringing it, "we want to use it, or store it, or destroy it."
Why would I do that?
In order to do this, he asked to engage in this work. "First of all, this person should be calm, brave, discerning and unselfish."
(2)
As we all know, Lu Xun made a sharp criticism of "national quintessence" in his early days. He used to think that he should pay less attention to the evidence, or not. Why did you advocate recklessness and utilitarianism as the first thing later? Is there a contradiction here? My point is: there is no contradiction, but there is development.
While many people conform to the trend of social development and demand to break through the shackles of worn-out culture, some diehards come out to preach the beauty of "national quintessence" and insist that everyone should stick to the same old tune. Are the unique things in our country necessarily good? Why do you want to preserve it and worship it as a god? To say that it is to preserve the "quintessence of the country" is actually to oppose innovation and try to preserve the ancient and restore the ancient. The situation at that time retained the "quintessence of the country" and did not abandon the old tune. It is very difficult to protect our country and people. And "saving us is indeed the first meaning" ("Hot Wind Random Thoughts" 35). He said: "Our top priorities now are: first, survival; second, adequate food and clothing; and third, development. If there are obstacles in this future, no matter ancient or modern, no matter whether people are ghosts, they are all "three graves" and "five classics", and they must be trampled down. " (It suddenly occurred to Gai Hua Ji [May 6th]) It can be seen that Lu Xun severely criticized the "national quintessence" at that time, and regarded it as an important signboard for die-hards to attempt to restore the ancients and oppose innovation, which dealt a blow to the "national quintessence", that is, to the reactionary forces of restoring the ancients. At that time, the main task on the front of the Cultural Revolution was to combat this retro trick and retro power. Obviously, it is not yet time to analyze the needs of heritage in detail and treat it differently.
It was Lu Xun who told the young people at that time to read less and not look at the credentials. He thought that the most important thing for young people at that time was "doing", not "saying". It doesn't matter if they can't write it for a while. The most important thing is not to leave real life, but to actively do something innovative (see Required Reading for Ji Youth). At that time, young people generally lacked the discrimination of the dross in the inheritance. It is out of love that they are advised to watch less or not, so that they will be less or not poisoned. Lu Xun never asked everyone to read less or pay attention to credentials in general. On the contrary, he has repeatedly lamented that too few people really understand the essence of heritage and correctly understand its function. He wrote A Brief History of Chinese Novels and An Outline of the History of China Literature, and collected many ancient books. He also wanted to write a history of literature himself, but unfortunately he failed. As long as we make a little analysis and compare the facts, we can know that there is no contradiction between his criticism of "national quintessence" and his later advocacy of "taking the first place"
Of course, things have developed. The main danger is not to go back to ancient times and worship foreign things. The average young man has grown up and has a certain sense of discrimination. The need to create revolutionary new literature and art is even more urgent. The introduction of Marxism–Leninism's literary theory and some experiences and lessons of the Soviet Union in criticizing and inheriting literary heritage all contribute to the development of Lu Xun's thoughts on this issue, making his views more dialectical, complete and deepened. I think this passage in the middle of About Translation (I), written one year before Takeism, reveals the important news of development:
..... But we can't decide that Soviet universities will "not compile anthologies of imperialist writers". This is not only the limitation of material resources, but also to protect the revolutionary baby, and not to put nourishing, useless and harmful food in front of him. And strong, smart, even if you show him opium or morphine, there is no great danger, but needless to say, on the one hand, there must be a prophet to predict that smoking will be addictive, and after addiction, it will become waste or social pests.
It is in this article that Lu Xun pointed out this famous point: "The farther away the author is from the reader, the more harmless the work is to the reader. Classical, reactionary and ideologically different works cannot touch the hearts of new youth (but naturally there must be correct instructions). On the contrary, they can learn the skills of description and the author's efforts. " Times have changed and new young people have grown up. In order to create revolutionary new literature and art, we must choose useful things from old literature and foreign works, so he wrote in the article "Takeism" that his thoughts developed with the change of the situation and the deepening of his research.
(3)
Why innovation must choose the old-choose the old culture at home and abroad?
On this issue, Lu Xun once quoted some words from Luna Charles Key, praising some measures he took at the beginning of the revolution, such as still preserving the inherent art of farmers and fearing that soldiers' mud boots would trample on the carpet of the palace. This truth, in Lu Xun's own words, is: "The new class and its culture did not suddenly fall from the sky, but generally developed in the resistance to the old dominator and its culture, that is, in the resistance to the old, so the new culture is still the inheritance and choice of the old culture." "The career created by the ancients includes the legacy that the emerging class can choose later." (Postscript to Faust and the City) "In the previous legacy, some young people thought that adoption was surrender because they confused adoption with imitation." (To Wei1April 9, 934) There are many such examples in the history of literature. Old literature has declined and new changes have come, which is often due to the absorption of folk literature or foreign literature. Impressionism in Europe was formed by absorbing the nutrition of China and Japanese paintings. So is the literature of the new class. All progressive, reasonable, scientific and beautiful things in the literary heritage can still provide beneficial elements for the new literary class, both ideologically and artistically. Why has a long history and rich cultural heritage become extremely favorable conditions for a country to create a new culture? Because there are so many nutrients to choose from in the old culture. Lu Xun's essays in his later period are the treasures of proletarian literature, which originated from the struggle against the old culture of landlords and bourgeoisie. It criticizes the dross in the old culture, absorbs, transforms and develops elements useful to the proletariat, and becomes an integral part of the new class and new culture. I can't imagine that if we don't choose China's old culture, we will produce such sharp Lu Xun's essays.
In fact, it is not only a new culture, but also a new fighter of the proletariat. Wasn't it first cultivated and transformed from the old society? There was no proletariat in the past. Even after the emergence of the proletariat, many revolutionaries, including revolutionary mentors, came from non-proletarian backgrounds and received long-term old education. The old culture did not stop them from changing their positions and even becoming revolutionary instructors. After they became revolutionary instructors, they still strongly advocated the absorption, transformation and utilization of the old culture. Lenin repeatedly emphasized the extreme importance of learning all the knowledge created by human beings in the task of the Youth League, arguing that proletarian culture did not fall from the sky, nor was it invented by those who claimed to be proletarian cultural experts. Only by accurately understanding the culture created in the whole process of human development and transforming this culture can we build proletarian culture. He said: "Marxism is a model of productism that comes from all human knowledge." (Selected Works of Lenin, Volume 4, p. 347. If the necessity of cultural heritage inheritance is denied, then the role of intellectuals and the role of intellectuals-born revolutionaries will be denied or doubted. The painful lessons we have accumulated in this regard are very shocking.
Lu Xun's thought was obviously influenced by Lenin and was consistent with him.
When he wrote "Takeism", the proletarian literature movement was waiting for vigorous development and the quality of proletarian literature and art was waiting for rapid improvement. However, many people are afraid of touching literary heritage. They don't want the old foreign culture to be defiled and captured in China. They also said that they should be new people and create new literature and art. Lu Xun accused these people of being "cowards" out of burning enthusiasm. For these people, most of them want to inspire their courage and push them forward because they "hate iron not to produce steel".
(4)
For "idiots" and "waste", Lu Xun only had anger and flogging, but for "losing his head", Lu Xun said a lot, putting facts and reasoning, hoping that they would stop being so afraid. Take a look, you can understand his article better.
First, he thinks that avoiding the old culture is a sign of weakness, powerlessness and unconfidence; Strong, brave and confident people will never do this. He said: "No matter where it comes from, as long as it is food, healthy people generally don't have to think about it and admit that it is edible. Only sick people often think of hurting their stomachs and bodies, and there are many taboos and taboos; There are a lot of reasons that are more harmful and ultimately irrelevant. For example, eating solids is harmless, and not eating them is particularly stable. It is better not to eat if it is beneficial. " He said that if people like this don't cheer up, they will be even weaker because they have lost their vitality because they are afraid all day. He added, "When we eat, we eat. Think about it, we are afraid that we will not digest beef, and we will doubt it when we drink tea. That's no good-the old man is like this. People with strength and confidence will not do this. " (About the Intellectual Class) If the intellectual class is so timid, hearing about Russia, seeing red, seeing Russian novels and being afraid of being harmed by western civilization, how can it make progress? Not only can it not progress, but it will surely perish in the future. He said that although the Han and Tang dynasties suffered from the border, they were very courageous and the people had the confidence not to be foreign slaves. When they take foreign things, they are driven by freedom and never care. At the moment of decline and injury, the nerves will become fragile and allergic, and when they encounter foreign things, they will push away, be afraid, shrink back, escape and shake into a ball. (See Tomb, Feeling in the Mirror) Are we willing to be the weak, or should we strive to be the strong?
Second, he believes that literary and artistic innovation must choose the old and be blindly afraid, which is absolutely impossible. He said: "If you want to make progress, you must always make new decisions from time to time, or at least learn from foreign countries. If all kinds of scruples, caution and nagging offend your ancestors, then you are just like Yi Di. You'll be walking on thin ice all your life, and it's too late to shake. How can you make good things? " Ten years later, when discussing the new woodcut, he pointed out that there were two methods. One is to "adopt foreign good rules and give full play to them to make our works fuller"; The other is "choose the inheritance of China, integrate new machines, and make future works unique". He thinks that we really know too little about the old culture, whether it is the essence of China's inheritance or the good rules of foreign inheritance, we have absorbed too little. As long as it is good, he said, "Even if the teacher is our enemy, we should learn from him" ("Let's talk about taking pictures of children").
Thirdly, he expounded the dialectics of preserving heritage and starting a new career. He said: "I firmly believe that a bright future will prove that we are not only the preservers of literary and artistic heritage, but also pioneers and builders." Do you want to make new achievements in literature and art? Then we must protect the legacy. Of course, preservation is different from ancient preservation, not for retro. Keeping it is not imitation and copying, but just to choose advantages. If it is preserved only for the sake of retro preservation, the heritage will not be preserved, because everyone is opposed to retro preservation. Only with the purpose of innovation and the recognition of the important role of selecting the old can the heritage be valued and cared for by everyone, so the real revolutionaries are the most ideal preservers of the heritage, and the essence of the heritage can only be developed in the hands of revolutionaries and become an indispensable material for building a new culture. Can we separate preservation (selection) from development and construction?
(5)
Finally, why should we be "reckless"?
This is a popular saying in our Jiangnan area. Three times seven, twenty-one is right. "Anyway" means that if you decide to do something after consideration and think you must do it, then don't hesitate. At the end of the discussion, whether it's twenty-one or twenty-one, it's settled anyway, and the opinions of others are left to him.
"First of all, regardless of the willy-nilly,' bring it'!" So the title is "Acquisitionism". If you don't have a little courage, look around, cringe, want to take it and be afraid, and dare not treat it separately, it's not called "takenism".
Habitualism is good because it is scientific. If you don't bring it first, many useful things will be erased and destroyed. What else can you use and store? Of course, we need to "criticize" the old culture, which is conducive to choice, but like the "idiot" of the Gang of Four, "criticizing the words first" and "opening the way with great criticism" actually means destroying a lot of heritage first. How to choose and use the heritage by burning it in large quantities or putting it in limbo by administrative order? Only by bringing it first and not destroying it can we choose. If you want to "approve", you can change it back even if the approval is correct. Anyway, things are still there and can't be remedied. How many cultural heritages have we destroyed in the ten-year catastrophe! "Usualism" is very good, because it is also revolutionary, and innovation cannot be separated from choosing the old. Without using it first, there is no way to innovate.
Lu Xun's ideas and propositions are particularly powerful, that is, science. Its revolutionary and scientific nature are unified, and scientific nature is always the foundation. The same is true of criticizing and inheriting literary heritage. A Brief Analysis of "Takeism" (Chinese Department of Peking University)
In this article, Lu Xun accurately summarized the viewpoint of criticizing and inheriting cultural heritage as "takenism" through a vivid metaphor. Its specific content includes the following aspects:
1. "Possess", that is, "take" it regardless of willy-nilly! Lu Xun not only criticized the "coward" who was timid in the face of the old heritage, but also criticized the "faint egg" who deliberately destroyed the heritage in order to show his revolutionary strength. For these seemingly vigilant and revolutionary "women" and "idiots", Lu Xun saw their essence through superficial phenomena. Lu Xun took a clear-cut stand and resolutely opposed the wrong tendency they represented, clearing the first obstacle for correctly criticizing and inheriting cultural heritage.
2. "Choose" means "use your head, let your eyes go and get it yourself!" Lu Xun divided the old heritage into three parts: one part is beneficial and harmless to the people (that is, "shark fin") to "take" and "use" to make it beneficial to people's health; Part of it is both toxic and useful (that is, "opium"), but it should be divided into two parts, correctly absorb and use its useful aspects, and remove its harmful toxins; There are still some people who don't need it at all (that is, "smoke pipes", "smoke lamps" and "aunts"), but they should be "destroyed" in principle, and some people should keep some and send them to museums to play their role in understanding and educating the people. In short, after "taking it", we must make careful identification and strict choice according to the interests of the proletariat before we can decide to abandon it: "Use it, save it, or destroy it." Not to compromise uncritically. Lu Xun dislikes and despises those "wasters" who "accept everything and happily jump into the bedroom to suck the remaining opium", that is, those who "inherit everything". This clears the second obstacle for correctly criticizing and inheriting cultural heritage.
3. Innovation, that is, "if the owner is a new owner, the house becomes a new house". "Possession" and "choice" are not ends, but for new literary creation and innovation. However, if we want to innovate well, we must be brave in criticizing and inheriting. Therefore, Lu Xun said: "People can't become newcomers without bringing them, and literature and art can't become new literature and art without bringing them."
The brilliant thought of "takenism" runs through the words and deeds and works of Lu Xun, the pioneer of the Cultural Revolution. As early as the May 4th Movement, on the one hand, he had a disharmonious struggle with imperialists and feudalists, and with those "quintessence school" who advocated respecting Confucius and reading classics and driving backwards. On the other hand, he also deeply studied China's cultural heritage, and made a lot of patient and meticulous textual research, compilation, collation and evaluation of cultural heritage, setting a brilliant example of critical inheritance. As for the introduction of foreign revolutionary culture, Lu Xun spent a lot of effort in his life. Lu Xun deeply felt the necessity and complexity of criticizing and inheriting cultural heritage from his revolutionary practice of participating in social struggle and literary struggle. Therefore, he conducted in-depth research and analysis on this issue and put forward many outstanding opinions. For example, in his article on the adoption of the old form (see "Essay on Borrowing a Street Pavilion"), he pointed out that the adoption of the old form "is not a mixture of antique fragments, but must be integrated into new works ... just like eating cattle and sheep, discarding hoof hair and retaining its essence to nourish and develop new life, so it will never be' similar' to cattle and sheep." "The old form has been occupied and must be deleted. If you delete it, you will gain something. This result is the emergence of new forms, that is, changes. " In the article "A Brief Discussion on the Chronicle of Woodcut" (see "Essays on the Jieting Pavilion"), he particularly pointed out: "It is a way to adopt foreign good rules and give full play to them to make our works fuller; This is also a way to choose China's heritage and integrate new machines to make future works unique. " It is not difficult to see that Lu Xun's exposition on critical inheritance is very correct and profound.
It is one of the outstanding writing characteristics of Lu Xun's essays to illustrate an abstract and profound truth through the metaphor of small and familiar things. Some articles are full of metaphors. This paper basically belongs to this type. In a short essay of 1000 words, it is almost impossible to talk about such a major and very rich critical inheritance problem. Even if you barely speak, writing it is likely to completely lose the characteristics of essays.
Therefore, Lu Xun, who is good at writing essays, naturally avoided this kind of writing, but skillfully used the analogy of inheriting a big house to clarify the truth of criticizing and inheriting cultural heritage by discussing his attitude towards this big house. Clever and appropriate, vivid and concrete, simple and easy to understand, and achieved good results. The clever use of this metaphor is not only due to the appropriateness of the whole metaphor, but also because of the appropriateness of each part of the metaphor. Needless to say, "loser", "idiot" and "waste" are all the same as "shark's fin", "opium", "pipe", "smoke lamp" and "concubine". Lu Xun is good at using metaphors because he has carefully observed and thought about the things to be explained, the things to be compared and the corresponding relationship between them, and made some efforts in the analysis and research from the outside to the inside. Therefore, no matter the whole metaphor or the local metaphor, people are amazed, not only deeply enlightened, but also artistic pleasure.
The clever use of metaphor greatly enhances the vividness of Lu Xun's essays. Although there are many factors that cause the vivid images of Lu Xun's essays, it cannot be said that the clever use of metaphors is a very important aspect. "When it comes to humiliating current affairs, the disadvantages are often classified." Many metaphors in Lu Xun's essays are natural. At first glance, they seem to come from the author's satirical ability, but in fact they are rooted in the author's profound life foundation and rich struggle experience. In the author's mind, the faces of such characters have long been drawn, so the shapes of pen and ink can be handy and balanced freely. For example, in this article, Lu Xun saw too many images such as "losers", "stupid eggs" and "waste", and his anger and contempt for these images have been brewing for a long time, so as long as they are written into the article, the faces of such characters will be vividly displayed immediately.
Sharp contrast and strong contrast are the second outstanding features of this article. This article is called "taking doctrine", but at the beginning it talks about "taking doctrine" and "sending doctrine", which seems to have taken a big turn. In fact, this is the very disciplined and skillful performance of Lu Xun's essays. First break the word, criticize "closing the door" and "sending away" in time, and then stand inside and put forward the view of "sending away" "Closed-doorism" and "send away" are antonyms of "takeaway", which is in sharp contrast with "takeaway". The more and more serious their shortcomings are, the more they can reflect the necessity and value of "takenism". Sure enough, after listing the disadvantages of "take-away doctrine", the article took a sharp turn and put forward "take-away doctrine", which is rigorous in logic and magnificent, and its value is also very prominent. "Closed-door Doctrine" and "Send-away Doctrine" are good foreshadows of "Take-away Doctrine". "Looking at the mountain does not like the peace" is a summary of people's writing experience for thousands of years, which meets the needs of expression and people's appreciation habits. Lu Xun's skillful writing style and skillful article structure are worthy of our study and reference. Outstanding humorous ability and excellent satirical art often make Lu Xun's essays interesting and make readers smile. Although this article is devoted to critical inheritance, the author's excellent humor and satirical ability have been repeatedly proved. The author has always been disgusted with the pursuit of fashionable "modern" style. In Ode to the Night, he once pointed out that the greasy sweat on the faces of fashionable "modern" girls made them embarrassed in public; In "Feeling Old", he once called those articles that were specially informers "modern" and gave them a high degree of contempt. In this paper, in order to satirize the behaviors and cliches of "giving away", the author said that "I don't want to say" giving away "here, otherwise it would be too unfashionable", which satirizes "giving away" and alludes to the "modern" style, killing two birds with one stone. Similar examples, you can also cite the satire on Shao Xunmei (Still Being a Son-in-law) and the satire on the quintessence of Chinese culture (China's cigarette lamp and pipe are called the quintessence of Chinese culture), so I won't go into details here. The formation of Lu Xun's outstanding humorous ability and superb satirical art was fundamentally caused by the struggle environment at that time, although it had the writer's own conditions. As Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out in "Speech at Yan 'an Forum on Literature and Art": "Lu Xun was under the rule of dark forces and had no freedom of speech, so he fought in the form of cynical essays." (Mao Zedong's speech at the National Conference on Propaganda Work of the * * * Production Party)