Such a big topic as "Looking forward to Chinese Literature in the 21st Century" is the most difficult one.At least I don't have that ability myself.And I believe that if English literature, French literature or Arabic literature all "look forward", the conclusions drawn by everyone will definitely not be the same.There are many extremely complicated reasons and motivations for the development of literature, which have been analyzed by many theorists, and many completely different conclusions have been drawn.Among the various reasons, only one is certain, that is, the development of literature has nothing to do with an artificially determined time limit.People's division of literature in different eras is the result of looking backward, and the biggest reason is for the convenience of discussion.Many great literatures, both written and orally recorded, have been created in this world long before the "century" is used to divide the ages.None of this literature has anything to do with the "century".We have used pictographic square characters for thousands of years.In the thousands of years before and after the so-called "AD", the literary development of square characters has nothing to do with the "century".Qu Yuan, Li Bai, Guan Hanqing, Pu Songling, and Cao Xueqin did not have the time concept of "century" at all.But this does not prevent them from creating the most outstanding literature.

In contrast, Chinese literature and the "century" were inevitably intertwined for a short time, counting from the era of Yan Fu and Lin Shu, a little over a hundred years in total.However, this one hundred years is the biggest and most profound hundred years of literary changes in square characters.In the past hundred years, we were first forced to change ourselves by others with strong boats and cannons, and then we changed ourselves with one revolution after another.For more than a hundred years, we have been eager to change ourselves almost all the time.Therefore, we have not only changed our concept of time, space, value and ethics, but also our aesthetic concept. We have changed ourselves from the inside out. "Tianxia" is no longer what it used to be. "China" is no longer what it used to be.Homeland is no longer what it used to be.The literature of square characters will never be the familiar look of Qu Yuan and Cao Xueqin.There is a common crisis hidden behind this great change: when the concept of space and time becomes bigger and bigger, more and more "world-oriented" and "globalized", people's hearts become more and more It gets smaller and narrower, and there is almost nothing outside the world and global standards given by others.The only thing I worry about is why I am not like others?Why not someone else?How can I become someone else?It was almost a no-holds-barred self-cancellation.The cultural critic Edward Said called this process the "Orientalization" of the East by the West.And I prefer to call everything after external colonization and other people's "Orientalization" self-colonization.

In December 1999, I was invited by "Sin Chew Daily" to come to Malaysia to participate in the "Hua Zong Literary Award" award activities, and gave speeches in Penang, Johor Bahru and other places.The following year, I found my presentation in Malaysia being drawn into a debate.Someone asked a Western sinologist that Li Rui once said in Malaysia: "Cao Xueqin is a greater writer than Shakespeare, do you agree with his statement?" The questioner mentioned "Li Rui said" is an abbreviation and simplification of "said".I also read the relevant reports in the newspapers at that time.I remember that when I mentioned Shakespeare and Cao Xueqin, my original intention was to say that one of them was born in the context of a Renaissance movement, while the other was just a lonely exploration in the dark with conscience.With the conscience and talent of a lonely man, he also expressed his profound humanitarian spirit and compassion that lasted thousands of years.They all wrote great works, but the exploration of the lonely man is even more valuable and great.In my speech, there is no simple judgment of who is "greater" than the other. What I emphasize is their completely different historical situations.In my opinion, it is also meaningless to say that Li Bai is greater than Du Fu, or that Cao Xueqin is greater than Shakespeare.That is no longer looking at literature with an aesthetic attitude.Whether the reporter or the quoter has simplified my meaning here is not what I want to talk about.Even if the judgment of whether the understanding is accurate is excluded, when any newspaper makes relevant reports, it will make some selection and simplification of events, even if it is only for the limitation of the layout, it must be abbreviated and simplified.The reason I specifically cite this example here is because it very subtly demonstrates a complex state of mind.

If you have a little understanding of the history of Chinese and Chinese in Malaysia, you can understand why my speech became "Cao Xueqin is greater than Shakespeare".It was a direct emotional and verbal resistance by a group of people who had been oppressed, discriminated against, excluded, and deprived for a long time.This kind of resistance has its full moral and emotional rationality, but at the same time, it also comes with a simple logic of either-or.Hope to fill that abyss of inequality with simple negation.This is a very common behavior and way of thinking in the so-called developing countries, in areas with a history of being colonized.In turn, this defect was immediately and simply substantiated into charges of "extreme nationalism", "nationalist fanaticism" and so on, and turned into an accusation against the people of all developing countries.The simple accusation of so-called "nationalism" has become the best excuse to cover up oppression, deprivation, and inequality, and has become the "original sin" of all developing countries and people.And this kind of behavior and way of thinking is very common in so-called developed countries and countries with a colonial history.Treating Cao Xueqin and Shakespeare with these two ways of thinking will lead to the following arguments: 

"You actually said that Cao Xueqin is greater than Shakespeare? You are obviously an extreme nationalist! You are obviously pursuing cultural fundamentalism!" "You say that Shakespeare is always the greatest and the model of all cultures, but you are stubbornly insisting on the cultural position of colonialism! You are obviously a Eurocentrist!" Such mutual simplification is farther and farther away from truth and rationality, and farther and farther away from a truly profound understanding.This kind of righteous debate almost immediately submerged literature in ideological and political judgments.Although I know that the current international cultural climate is "political correctness", in my opinion, what literature expresses is something completely different from politics, and literature is much broader than politics!A Chinese mother loses her child, and a British mother loses her child. Their pain is the same. There is no need to choose ideology and political positions in advance.Therefore, apart from all ideological and political judgments, the life tragedies profoundly expressed by Cao Xueqin and Shakespeare are also literature and great art, and this is the source and reason for the existence of literature.It is also in this sense that all works created by literature in different languages ​​are equal.All judgments about "European cultural center", "Chinese cultural center" and "American cultural center" are historical limitations and illusions.They are all myths created for certain powers and interests.I know that what I say about the equality of literature and culture is an ideal imagination.And ideals are almost never seen.On this planet we live, people see generations of deprivation and inequality, generations of self-harm and oppression of others.But, before there was so-called colonialism, international monopoly, and despotism, didn't great literature already exist?Amid all the colonialism, international monopoly, and despotism, haven't people been creating great literature and art?Do Shakespeare and Cao Xueqin really have no other meaning besides the so-called "European center", "cultural fundamentalism" and "nationalism"?It is a great misfortune to be deprived, oppressed, and treated unequally by others. Why should we use this unfortunate resentment to pollute literature? life expression?The saddest thing is, why should we internalize the deprivation and discrimination of other generations into our only judgment criterion?Using the scale of oppression and deprivation in the world to divide the superiority and inferiority and ranks on the territory of world literature, isn't it the greatest irony to literature and mankind? 

Yes, throughout the ages, the existence of literature has never reduced even the slightest bit of suffering in the world.However, the existence of literature has always proved the cruelty of deprivation and oppression, the preciousness of a life tortured by suffering, the sadness of the shackles that people have brought to themselves, and the fact that life should be enjoy happiness and freedom. We may not be able to predict the direction of literature in the 21st century, but we can believe in the efforts that literature must make.The result of these countless efforts, whether it is written in Chinese, English, French, Arabic, Malay, or any language that we are not familiar with, it should first of all be something that we all deeply understand. Love the "literature".This is the confidence that all writers should have.

Written on August 25, 2001 On October 5, it will be rescheduled in Taiyuan, Shanxi