Chapter 4 The Enlightenment of "Green Peace" to Literature, Part Two of "A Matter of Writing"

The second part "Greenpeace" enlightenment to literature (1) I doubt very much that the way of "sage inside and king outside" can be both a philosophy and a religious spirit at the same time.I very much doubt that such a philosophy can not be swayed by politics, and in the end it is still a non-ethical and non-practical academic.I doubt that under the guidance of such a philosophy, all knowledge and academics can maintain their independent status without submitting to politics.I doubt very much that such a philosophy is not the root of "art serving politics".I doubt that politics can be governed with passion and whimsy, and I doubt that serious politics can be done without passion and whimsy.

I have no doubt that art is useful as well as political.I don't doubt that men are beautiful and women are also beautiful. Men and women can have children, but intersex people are a disease, and they can't have children if they are not beautiful.I don't doubt that the world of yin and yang can only move beautifully when they contradict each other and complement each other. The imbalance of yin and yang is a disease, and the indiscrimination of yin and yang is a sign of death.I have no doubt that religious spirit, philosophy, science, politics, economics...should perform their duties and cooperate with each other, but they cannot replace each other.

If the religious spirit is lost, how will it be rebuilt? This is a difficult problem.Since it comes from the longing of life, how can it be reconstructed with reason (if you can’t laugh, I’ll tickle you and you’re still laughing, but what we want is a real smile from the heart)?But to untie the bell, the person who tied it needs to be asked first: since it is the longing of life, how did it get lost? In my memory, in the 1950s, people didn't know how communism would be built step by step (there was scientific socialism, but there was no scientific communism).But this in no way prevents people from believing in it sincerely, and people don't even need to be persuaded to believe in it, because it is just the beautiful ideal that people aspire to, or is just the same as the beautiful ideal that people aspire to.But then someone replaced it with a false political alias, and exploited the enthusiasm for it for their own benefit (such as the "Gang of Four"), and unknowingly turned it into a bad superstition, and people Gradually lost in it, not only lost the belief in it, but even had doubts about sincerity and kindness, how could it not be tired, low self-esteem, or a mess? So can correct politics replace it? (Correct housekeeping can replace love ?) No, for at least three reasons: first, they use two different methods and logics; killing ten good people and making preparations for a national president, leaving an opportunity for political crooks such as the "Gang of Four"); third, once people demand political science and reality (to be realized) The ideal paradise of happiness, isn’t it that politicians make difficult problems for themselves? Therefore, when we say that ideals must be realized, we must understand that this is also an ideal.Ideals are never for realization, but for leading people to move forward and walk out of a beautiful process.Saying this is not afraid of people being disappointed with ideals; unless he is not living, he must set up an ideal that can withstand beatings-the aspiration of life makes it so.Don't lie to him to live, otherwise he will be disappointed to death once he understands.Let people live freely, people will think and imagine for themselves, describe the ideal state for themselves, and the description will become more and more beautiful and lofty, thus inspiring life more, not afraid of difficulties, creating endlessly, the instinct of life overcomes the instinct of death, everything Politics, economy, science, and art will be full of vigor and become more exciting and perfect, and a group of people will have cohesion.When people are so proud of the magnificence of life, they will realize that this is the realization of ideals.When people are walking step by step toward the realm of life aspirations, ideals are being realized, and ideals can only be realized in this way, so there is no need to be sorry.

Now I understand a little bit, rebuilding the religious spirit depends on nourishment, let the plundered and already barren land rest and fertilize again, let the lost and tired people take a breath to contemplate and imagine freely, outstanding people and good luck coming soon. Literature is such a land longing for fertilization, and literature is such free contemplation and whimsy, don't plunder it, strangle it, bind it for any reason, and of course don't encourage it.I don't know if this will work. 9. Literature is creation. Since creation is finding a way where there is no way, how can literary criticism guide it? However, if literary criticism cannot guide literature, why use literary criticism?

Literary criticism must not rely too much on learning to guide literature (of course, let alone policies). limit it.If you want people to explore, but also stipulate how they should explore, then simply say that you don't want others to explore; if the right to explore is monopolized, it will soon become a bad superstition.Perhaps the guidance of literary criticism should lead the guidance of literature to areas where there is no way, and fully contract the rights of literary exploration and creation to literature.The respect for the creator is nothing more than leading him into the labyrinth and the valley of death to see how he gets out and how he comes back to life.Of course he couldn't be tied up and left there.In addition, as a writer, you don't need anything else, and things like carrying a big sedan chair will delay things.

Zen disciples are confused, and ask the Zen master for directions, but the master does not say where the way is, but tells the disciples the koan.Koan, as I understand it, is to use ordinary things to talk about paradox, and paradox is actually a place where intelligence and existing knowledge are lost and nowhere to go.The master taught his disciples to meditate quietly here, and then create their own way of life.Comprehension is at your feet, and creation is at your feet. This is beyond the control of predecessors and others, intelligence and knowledge. Literary criticism guides literature, maybe it should be like Zen masters guide their disciples, so that literature will not be reduced to a craft of imitating ancient times, or a technique of extracting knowledge.

Literary criticism is of course not only to guide literature, but also to explain literary phenomena, help readers understand works, and other tasks.This is another question. 10. The enlightenment of modern physics, oriental mysticism and supernatural powers to literature. I am not proficient in physics, nor in Buddhism, Taoism, or Zen, nor do I have supernatural powers.I dare to mention them, purely as a literature lover out of interest in mysterious and unknown things, because that is the background of life. Classical physics in the past has been looking for pure objective indivisible solid particles that make up objects.But modern physics has discovered: "These particles are not composed of any material material, but a continuous change, a continuous 'dance' of energy, and a process." Space is composed of...not both field and matter, because the field is the only reality.” “Mass and energy are mutually transformable, where a large amount of energy is concentrated is an object, and where a small amount of energy exists is a field. Therefore, matter It is not something completely different in nature from the 'space of the field', but just manifested in a different form." This cancels the hope of finding "indivisible solid particles".

The general meaning of the "parallel principle" of modern physics is: "The properties of light and electrons are sometimes similar to waves and sometimes similar to particles, depending on the means of observation. That is to say, they have wave-particle duality, but waves and electrons cannot be observed at the same time. However, the evidence obtained from various observations cannot be included in a single picture, and can only be considered as a totality that complements each other to form the phenomenon." The "uncertainty principle" of modern physics says: "In fact, both precise position and The concept of precise velocity is meaningless in nature. The precise measurement of one observable quantity will lead to considerable uncertainty in the measurement of another quantity.” That is to say, any time we observe the world, we must lose sight of the other. of.This cancels any hope of finding a "purely objective" world. "Finding" already implies subjective participation.

The "embedded view" of modern physics holds that we are embedded in the nature we describe.It is no longer true that the world exists in isolation from us.In a strange sense, the universe is a universe in which observers participate.The "anthropic principle" of modern cosmology draws this conclusion: "The object is not generated by the subject, and the object does not exist in isolation from the subject." The above-mentioned careful thinking is very similar or identical to the sayings of "emptiness", "formlessness", "dependent origination", "all things", "everything is only consciousness" and so on in Buddhism, Taoism and Zen. (There is a book called "Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism" which explains this clearly and convincingly.)

The second part "Greenpeace" enlightenment to literature (2) It seems that we can never escape from our subjectivity, nor can we obtain a purely objective world. "Matter known through sensation is the only real world" - this is what Engels said.In this way, can we still think that beauty is objective? Can we still think that literature can reflect something completely objectively? Can we still think that (at least in literature) there is a single correct doctrine or school? Does the world have to be a realistic, clear, and smiling world? Especially for life, can you still think that there is only one truth?  …

What enlightenment does the supernatural power have? The supernatural power proves that the spirit (idea) is also a form of energy (and may be a more "mass concentrated" energy than objects), so it is not fundamentally different from matter , is nothing but the “display of different forms” of energy.How, then, can it be said that the spirit is a secondary thing? It exists in itself like other three-dimensional objects and affects our lives, why is it only secondary? Why is it that a mountain or a machine The energy that exists in form is primary, but the energy that exists in the form of spirit is secondary? In fact, no theory or doctrine can be separated from the spirit—including theories and ideas that deny this view. Doctrine, we have always been in the spirit and three-dimensional matter (in multi-dimensional), which is a kind of field, and "the field is the only reality."So we don’t need to ask literature not to be separated from life, firstly it cannot be separated, secondly it is also creating life, it is a part of life, and it has every right to create an unreal dream-like life (who can deny the value of fantasy? ), it has its own relatively independent position like other forms of energy, and at the same time it is interconnected with everything else to form a field.An interconnected field, an interconnected net, which point is primary? In addition, those actions of supernatural powers that seem too strange in the three-dimensional world clearly mean that it has at least surpassed the three-dimensional world, and the way to surpass it is the spirit (idea).From this, it comes to mind, how will a certain stagnation of literature be surpassed? Every real transcendence of human beings means the transcendence of maintenance.Man develops the world and himself in such transcendence step by step, and constitutes an eternal march and dance.When transcendence stagnates, dancing becomes tired, and literature becomes petty.Before Einstein, physicists claimed that they could only make a difference in a few digits after the decimal point, so they were a bit petty. Until Einstein's transcendence of dimension opened up an extremely rich and broad field of physics. Everyone They emerged one after another, and physics has flourished to this day.What about literature? How will literature go beyond? I don't know.But I think that literature that takes care of people and their situation as their mission can probably allocate more energy to describe ordinary life, and move towards the mysterious spirit, and then put this spirit-characterized animal in the ever-expanding In the system (in the field), let’s take a look at his position and situation, so as to know what kind of attitude we should have towards this world, in addition to the humane attitude such as the law.People always have to surpass in life.Literature must always go beyond in life.But how to go beyond? Shi Tiesheng's IQ seems to be far from enough. 11. "Greenpeace"'s inspiration to literature. Greenpeace is also called the Green Party.Starting from maintaining the ecological balance of nature, it gradually involves all fields of social life and develops a new set of world outlook and outlook on life.It believes that people's attitudes towards the world in the past are paternal or male, aggressive, extractive, and predatory, while it advocates a maternal or female attitude towards the world, that is, a reconciled coexistence and reciprocal attitude.I think it must have seen the position and situation of people in a larger system.For example, if our field of vision is limited to the crowd, we will regard "regulating the family and governing the country and the world" as the highest goal, so that we will not be able to escape the circle of rule of man, class struggle, and nationalism. What is respected is the clear rules and precepts of power and ethics. Interpersonal power, struggles, and the suppression of human nature make people suffer.When we can go beyond this point of view and look down on the entire human being like a god, we expand the system by one dimension.When we see that mankind as a whole is facing a common predicament, we have human consciousness, and we take humanitarianism, freedom, equality and fraternity as lofty ideals, and reject interpersonal struggles, power and all kinds of man-made restraints.But at that time, people were not wise enough, and they were too arrogant when exploiting and utilizing nature. They ambitiously declared to conquer nature as they did in the past when they conquered alien races, so that in the end they became oppressive and plundering of nature, but they did not realize that man was the leader of the entire network of nature. One part, the subjugation of the part upsets the balance of the whole.The loss of balance in the natural ecology brings disasters to human beings as well.When we are clear about this, we will see the relationship between people and the world in a larger system.We know that we must advocate the equality of man and all things in nature as we advocate the equality of everyone, and we will give up wanton abuse of the entire network of nature as we give up interpersonal power and killing. Despising the paternal heroic view in the past, the most respected will be reconciliation, coexistence and reciprocity, where people and all things merge into a beautiful dance, and people are more free and joyful in such a field.From the people of class, to the people of the nation, to the people of human beings, to the people in the natural field, the system expands step by step.This kind of expansion is endless. The so-called "Infinity is Tai Chi", this shows that there is no need to be pessimistic about literature. Too). So I think that literature should also enter a larger system. Since it is anthropology, at least we should redefine words such as "conquer", "master", and "truth".At least we should realize that we are children of nature when we are "swallowing mountains and rivers".At least when we advocate and insist on a kind of doctrine or genre, we should understand that literature also has an ecological environment and a field, which one or which faction should act as a paternal hero, reject all beings, and set up a universal one. Accurate truths will destroy the field and at the same time embarrass oneself in particular.Partial truths are plural, and universal truths (that is, overall truths) are the recognition of such pluralities—people cannot justify themselves, which is the magic of paradox. 12. The so-called "aristocratic" actually has two meanings, one is derogatory and the other is commendatory. A group of people, who have already solved their own living problems such as food, clothing, housing and transportation, think that the world is full of food and clothing, and no longer care about the suffering of the public or even social justice. This is of course extremely bad. There is nothing wrong with a group of people who have no worries about physical survival, so they have the spare energy to care about people's spiritual life, and even focus on discussing people's ultimate problems. This is not wrong, and it is very necessary. Mental problems are indeed higher than physical problems, just as man is higher than other animals.However, if a person who discusses spiritual issues pretends to be superior to others because of this, this is of course extremely stupid, which shows that he has not yet fully understood what the human spirit is, and such discussions will probably not yield any good results. Mental problems or ultimate human problems are bound to appear more mysterious than physical problems or daily life problems.Discussions on the former are often not popular among the general public, and they are even obviously divorced from reality. This is normal, and it does not mean that such explorers should be transferred to reform through labor, or change their course to accommodate some popular ideas. Einstein and middle school physics teachers, and "Shaolin Temple", space shuttles and crosswalks, organ transplants and cold potions, complicated love and simple births, esoteric philosophies and usual moral norms...is there any need to argue about this or Want that? Both! Isn’t it? Just don’t use the word “aristocracy” to stifle people’s fantasy, and don’t use it to pretend to be unearthly.Only when two poles repel and attract each other can there be harmony in the field. The term "aristocratic" is borrowed, because in the past, only the nobles had no worries about food and clothing, and had time to pay attention to the spirit.It can now be considered to expel the word "aristocracy" from the academic field and let it return to its original field. The food, clothing, housing and transportation problems of most Chinese people have not yet been solved. Perhaps this is the reason why Chinese people care more about such problems and less about spiritual life? But why have the Chinese people always paid attention to such problems, but they have not been able to solve them? class problem? Overpopulation is one of the causes, for example.But if traced back to its roots, the overpopulation may well be the consequence of a constant lack of concern for spiritual life. - This is an overly complex topic. I just want to stop using "aristocracy" as a crime to limit people's concern for spiritual life, and don't use "civilianization" as a good name for caring less about spiritual life.These two words should not be academic terms.At least these two words have too many ambiguities, so be careful when using them. I think literature should be more "spiritualized". The second part "Greenpeace" enlightenment to literature (3) 13. Optimism and pessimism. The fundamental predicament of man has already been said.Not seeing this kind of predicament, ignoring this kind of predicament, not daring to face this kind of predicament—the optimism sustained by this is the optimism of fools, and those who believe in this kind of optimism will one day find that they have been deceived Smirking, turning into despair, miserable. Seeing this kind of predicament, one can no longer cheer up in desperation, and can do nothing but complain and lament—this kind of pessimism is foolish pessimism.A person who believes in this kind of pessimism is really miserable. He simply doesn't have a good day.It has also been said that one can turn adversity into an opportunity for joy. The human situation includes all real existence, including external smooth roads and difficulties, as well as inner optimism and pessimism. If you don't admit it, you will easily become a fool.Therefore, it is unreasonable to use pessimism or optimism to judge whether a literary work is good or bad.To express and discuss all human situations, all emotions and moods is a legitimate act of literature, which just shows that it is not contaminated with idiotism.When people turn all the smooth roads and difficulties, optimism and pessimism into art, to contemplate, feel, and contemplate, people will achieve spiritual transcendence in the aesthetic sense. He no longer cares about smooth roads or difficulties, optimism or pessimism. Listening to people's footsteps and voices, he only cares about whether all these are beautiful or not (beauty here still does not refer to beauty, but to pride combined with awe).Therefore, optimism and pessimism are really not the criteria for judging literary works, let it return to the field where it should be. Besides, from another logical point of view, isn’t it optimism to dare to face everything? It must be pessimism if it is concealed.From this point of view, those who dare to write pessimistic works are optimistic, and those who only shout optimism are pessimistic—paradox always haunts us.