Selected Essays of Master Lu Xun

Lu Xun

• Éditeur: Simon & Schuster
• Année: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781476774930
• Sujet: Littérature
• Sous-sujet: Dissertations littéraires

The Selected Essays of Master Lu Xun collects together his most influential and powerful essays and lectures. Critical of traditional Chinese culture, of the superstition and rigid social mores, and passionate in his argument for reform, his essays from the classic contemplation on Confusion patriarchy "What Is Required of Us as Fathers Today, " to his critique of Chinese identity politics "My Mustache" are exemplary of Chinese thought, society, and politics in a transitional historic period.

■ What Is Required of Us as Fathers Today

My real purpose in writing this essay is to consider how to reform the family. And since in China parents——especially fathers——wield great authority, I want to express some views on the hitherto sacrosanct question of fathers and sons. In a word, the revolution is catching up with the old man himself. But why such high and mighty airs and such a pretentious title? The reason for this is twofold.

First, there are two things in China which “the sages' disciples” cannot bear to have touched. We need not go into the first, which does not concern us. The second is “human relationships,” and some careless remarks on this score have already involved us in trouble, earning us such bad names as “corrupters of morals” or “beasts in human guise”. Paternal authority is considered absolute: of course whatever the old man says is right, while the son is wrong before he opens his mouth. Yet grandfathers, fathers, sons and grandsons are simply rungs in the ladder of human life, not something fixed and immutable. The son of today is the father of tomorrow and the grandfather of the future. I know that my contemporaries and readers are, if not yet fathers, expectant fathers, and all have a chance of becoming ancestors——it is simply a matter of time. In order to save trouble, therefore, we need not stand on ceremony, but may just as well take up a strategic position and hold forth with all a patriarch's dignity about ourselves and our children. This will not only simplify matters for us when we become fathers in future, but since precedents exist in China for such presumptions, “the sages' disciples” should not be frightened off. In fact, this is killing two birds with one stone. That is why I speak of “What is required of us as fathers today.”

Secondly, I have touched briefly on the problems of the family in the “Random Thoughts” (Numbers 25, 40 and 49) in New Youth, my main contention being that we of this generation should start to emancipate all coming after us. The emancipation of children is something so natural that it should need no discussion, but the elder generation in China has been too poisoned by the old customs and ideas ever to come to its senses. For instance, if a crow caws in the morning, young people think nothing of it, but the superstitious old folk will be in a flutter for hours. It is most pathetic, but they are past curing. Thus the only way is for those who have seen the light to start by emancipating their own children. Burdened as a man may be with the weight of tradition, he can yet prop open the gate of darkness with his shoulder to let the children through to the bright, wide-open spaces, to lead happy lives henceforward as rational human beings.

Incidentally, I mentioned once that I was not an original thinker, only to be abused by the supplement New Instruction to a Shanghai paper. But before examining other things we should first examine our hearts, to avoid sailing under false colours; only so can we do the right thing by ourselves and others, or say anything worth saying. I am perfectly aware that I am not an original thinker, nor have I hit upon any new truth. Whatever I say or write is taken from things seen and heard in daily life which strike me as sound. As for the absolute truth, I have no means of knowing it. Nor can I predict what advances and changes there will be in men's outlook a few years from now, though I am sure it will have changed and advanced. That is why I speak of “What is required of us as fathers today”.

What strikes me as sound at the moment is something extremely simple. That is, judging by the animal world, our first duty is to preserve life, our second to propagate it, our third to improve it (in other words, evolution). All living creatures behave in this way, and fathers should be no exception.

The value of life need not concern us here, nor the different scales of value. We know from common sense that nothing matters more to living creatures than life. For all creatures are what they are precisely because they have life——without this they would cease to be living creatures. And in order to preserve life animals have certain instincts, the most conspicuous being the desire for food, which makes them take nourishment, to keep themselves warm and maintain life. Still, since individual animals must all grow old and die, in order to propagate life they possess another instinct——sexual desire. This leads them to have sexual intercourse, produce offspring, and propagate life. So while the desire for food preserves each individual and the life of the moment, sexual desire preserves posterity and life everlasting. Eating and drinking are not sinful or unclean, and neither is sexual intercourse. Eating and drinking result in self-preservation, but this is no favour conferred upon ourselves; sexual intercourse results in children, but this is no favour conferred upon the children. One after another we advance down the long road of life, the only difference between us being that some come earlier, some later. But no one need feel under an obligation to anyone else.

Unfortunately, the old way of thinking in China is just the reverse of this. Marriage is simply “the third of the five relationships”, yet it is called “the starting point”. Sexual intercourse is a normal thing, yet it is considered unclean. Birth is also a normal thing, yet it is considered a tremendous achievement. Most people have inhibitions about marriage. Relatives and friends crack all kinds of lewd jokes, and the bride and groom feel they have done something shameful; thus even when a child is born they still beat about the bush and dare not announce it. In front of the child, though, what airs they put on! In fact, we can say they behave exactly like newly-rich who have gained their wealth through theft. I do not mean——as those who attack me claim——that human beings should have promiscuous sexual intercourse like animals or, like shameless rogues, pride themselves on their degradation. I mean that henceforward those who have seen the light should purge themselves of those inhibitions peculiar to us in the East, become purer and more intelligent, understanding that husbands and wives are companions, coworkers, and creators of new life. The children born are entrusted with new life, but they cannot keep it for ever; they in turn will have to hand it on to their children, just as their parents did. All hand on the torch to those after them, only some come earlier in the race, some later.

Why must life be propagated? So that it can develop and evolve. Each individual is mortal, and no bounds at all are set to evolution; therefore life must continue, advancing along the path of evolution. For this, a certain inner urge is needed, like the urge of a unicellular creature which in time enables it to multiply, or the urge of invertebrate animals which in time enables the vertebrae to appear. This is why the later forms of life are always more significant and complete, hence more worthwhile and precious; and the earlier forms of life should be sacrificed to the later.

Unfortunately, the old way of thinking in China is just the reverse of this. The young should take first place, but instead it is taken by the old. The emphasis should be on the future, but instead it is on the past. The elder generation is sacrificed to the generation before it; yet, with no means to outlive itself, it expects the younger generation to sacrifice itself for the elder's sake, destroying all that could carry it forward. I do not mean——as those who attack me claim——that grandsons must spend their whole time beating their grandfathers, and daughters must for ever be cursing their mothers. I mean that henceforward those who have seen the light should purge themselves of the unsound ideas long handed down in the East, show a greater sense of responsibility towards their children and drastically cut down on all thought of privilege, to build up a new morality in which the young take first place. And the young will not remain in a privileged position for ever; they will have to do their duty by their own children. All hand on the torch to those after them, only some come earlier in the race, some later.

The statement that “the son need feel under no obligation to his father” is largely responsible for making “the sages' disciples” turn crimson with rage. Their mistake lies in their selfishness and belief that the old should take first place. They have a strong sense of privilege, but not much of responsibility. To them the relationship between father and son is summed up in the words: “I owe my life to my father.” Hence the young should belong entirely to the old. Even more decadent is their demand for a return which arises out of this, and their assumption that the young should be sacrificed entirely to the old. In fact, the way of the natural world is completely at variance with this; but since ancient times we have flouted the will of Heaven, and that is why our people's strength has been sapped and society has come to a standstill. Though we cannot say that this means we are going to perish, we are certainly closer to ruin than to progress.

While there may be defects in the natural order, its method of linking old and young is not at fault. It makes no use of “favours”, but provides animals with an instinct which we call “love”. All living things, apart from those like fish which have so many offspring that they cannot get round to loving them all, show great affection for their young. Not only are they free from selfishness; they may even sacrifice themselves to enable their progeny to advance along the long road of development.

Mankind is no exception. In European and American families, the young and weak usually take first place, and this is most closely in keeping with natural laws. Even in China, all those who are pure of heart and uncorrupted by “the sages’ disciples” quite naturally manifest this instinct too. It will never occur to a village woman, for example, when she is nursing her baby, that she is conferring a favour; and no peasant will look on his marriage as form of usury. When children are born, their parents instinctively love them and want them to live. More than this, they want their children to surpass them, and this is evolution. This love, free from all thought of barter and profit, is the tie that binds men together, the bond between man and man. If we accept the old view, brushing love aside to speak only of “favours” and expecting some return, in addition to destroying the proper relations between father and son, this will reverse the true parental affection and sow the seeds of hatred. A man once wrote a verse entitled “To Encourage Filial Piety”, which ran something like this:

Your dear mother is working at home, boy,

As to school with your yellows you run;

She is making you sweet almond broth, boy——

Will you still be an unfilial son?

This writer considered himself “an ardent champion of morality”. But, in fact, the almond broth of the rich and the bean milk of the poor have the same value in love, and possess this value only if the parents expect no reward. Otherwise this degenerates into trading, and the almond broth is like the human milk given to pigs to fatten them. Morally speaking, it is worthless.

So what strikes me as sound at the moment is simply “love”.

Men of all countries and callings will agree that self-love is justified. It is the main cause of self-preservation and the propagation of life. Because the future is determined in the present, the defects of parents may lead to the death of their sons and endanger life. Although in Ghosts Ibsen's main emphasis is on the relation between men and women, from this play we also see the horror of congenital disease. Oswald is an artist who wants to live, but owing to his father's dissolute life he has contracted a congenital disease and his health breaks down. Since he is devoted to his mother and cannot bear to give her the trouble of looking after him, he conceals some morphine, intending to ask the maid Regina to give this to him when his illness grows critical, so that he can poison himself. But Regina leaves, and he has to rely on his mother.

Oswald: Well, now you have got to give me that helping hand, Mother.

Mrs. Alving (with a loud scream): I!

Oswald: Who has a better right than you?

Mrs. Alving: I? Your mother?

Oswald: Just for that reason.

Mrs. Alving: I, who gave you your life!

Oswald: I never asked you for life. And what kind of a life was it that you gave me? I don't want it! You shall take it back!

This passage should serve as a warning to those of us who are fathers, arousing our admiration even while it makes us shiver. Nor must we stifle our conscience and say it is only right for our sons to suffer. Many such cases, too, may be found in China. Anyone who works in a hospital constantly sees the pathetic sight of children suffering from congenital syphilis; yet usually it is the parents who swagger in with these children to hospital. Syphilis is not the only fearful congenital disease, though. Many other spiritual and bodily ailments can be handed down, until, as time goes on, the whole of society suffers. There is no need to hold forth here on mankind; solely from the child's point of view we can affirm that those with no selflove have no right to be fathers. Even if they insist on becoming fathers, they are like the bandits of old who set themselves up as kings——they have no claim whatsoever to the true succession. In future, when science is more advanced and society has improved, such descendants of theirs as have managed to survive will undoubtedly be dealt with by eugenists.

If the parents of today have not passed on any spiritual or physical defects to their children, and no accident has happened, these boys and girls will naturally be healthy, and the propagation of life will have been achieved. The parents' responsibility does not end here, however, for while life continues it must not stand still——the new life must be taught to develop. The higher animals not only nurture and protect their young, but usually teach them the skills they need to survive. Thus birds show their fledglings how to fly, beasts of prey show their cubs how to strike. Since human beings are several stages higher, their instinct also is to want their children to outdo them; and this, too, is love. We were speaking before of the present, but this love concerns the future. Anyone with an open mind wants his children to be stronger, healthier, cleverer and better than he is——happier too. He wants them to outstrip him, to outstrip the past. But before this can be achieved there must be change: descendants should change the ways of their ancestors. “The filial son is he who during the three years' mourning does not change his father's ways”——such a saying is plain nonsense and the root of much backwardness. If the unicellular creatures of ancient times had observed this rule, they would never have dared to divide and multiply, and there would be no men on earth.

Luckily, though such sayings have poisoned the minds of many, they could not completely destroy all men's natural impulses. The instincts of those who have not read the works of the sages still sprout from time to time under the axe of Confucian morality; and this is why the Chinese, although going downhill, have not perished.

So from now on those who have seen the light ought to extend and deepen this natural love, and sacrifice themselves, with no thought of self, for those who come after them. The first prerequisite for this is understanding. The mistake made earlier in the West was to look upon children as grown-ups in the making. The mistake in China was to see them as men in miniature. It is only in recent years, and thanks to the researches of many scholars, that we have learned that the child's world is completely different from that of a fully grown man; and if instead of understanding children you ride roughshod over them, you seriously impede their development. Thus the children should always come first. In Japan recently this has been generally realized; a great deal has been done for children and a thorough study made of them. The second prerequisite is guidance. Since situations change, life must evolve. Men of a later age are bound to differ from their predecessors, and it would be unreasonable to force them all into one mould. Grown-ups should give guidance and advice, but not issue orders. Far from expecting the young to wait on them, they should devote all their energies to the young generation, bringing them up with sturdy bodies to stand hardship, with fine, lofty principles, and independent, inquiring minds to accept new ideas, so that they have the strength to swim in the new current and not be drowned by it. The third prerequisite is emancipation. Children are a part of us, yet separate from us, belonging to humanity. Since they are a part of us, we must do our duty by educating them and enabling them to stand on their own feet. Since they are separate from us, they should be emancipated at the same time so that they belong entirely to themselves and become independent.

Thus the parents' duty to their children is to give them good health, the best education possible, and complete emancipation.

But some people are afraid that in future parents will be left with nothing, that it will be very sad for them. This fear of loneliness and boredom which also stems from the wrong ideas of the past will naturally disappear if we understand the laws of biology. But parents who mean to emancipate their children should also equip themselves with a certain ability. For then, even though you are tainted by the past, you will not lose the power to think and act independently, and will have wide interests and cultivated pleasures. Do you want to be happy? Even your future life will be happy too. Do you want to grow young again? Your children will be your second youth, but independent and better. This is the only way to discharge your duty as an elder and find full satisfaction in life. But if all your thoughts and actions are modelled on the past, and all you will do is nag and boast of your seniority, of course you cannot escape loneliness and boredom.

Some may fear that emancipation may set up a barrier between father and son. The European and American family, as everyone knows, is not nearly as autocratic as the Chinese. But although the Westerners have been compared with wild beasts, today even the Confucians who “champion morality”, stand up for them, saying that there are “no unfilial sons or rebellious younger brothers” in the West. Evidently it is because they are emancipated that they love each other. It is precisely because the old there do not oppress the young that there are no unfilial sons or rebellious younger brothers opposing oppression. If you use force or bribes, then no matter what happens you cannot “remain in power for ever”. But let us take the case of China again. In the Han and Tang dynasties and at the end of the Ching dynasty, we had systems whereby filial sons could become officials. Thus in addition to parental exhortation there was state encouragement; yet even so there were very few limb-cutters. This proves that from ancient times till now the old ideas and old ways have achieved very little, simply making the bad more hypocritical and causing more useless suffering to the good.

Love alone is true. Lu Tsui once quoted Kung Yung as saying: “What feeling has a father for his son? He begets him because of lust. And a son's relation to his mother is like that of a thing that has been put in a jar, which becomes quite separate once it is taken out.” (At the end of the Han dynasty quite a few exceptional figures appeared in the Kung family, which had not then run to seed as it has today. It is possible that Kung Yung really said this, but it is amusing that Lu Tsui and Tsao Tsao should be the ones to attack him.) Though this, too, was an attack against old ideas, it really is not correct. For when parents give birth to a child, they instinctively love it, with a deep, enduring love which does not soon end. Since we have not yet reached a time of universal brotherhood, there are different degrees of love, and a child's intense love for its parents cannot easily be destroyed. So we need not be afraid of any drifting apart. There may be freaks who remain impervious to love. But if love has no hold upon them, then neither will any talk of “gratitude, principle and morality.”

Some again may fear that emancipation will mean unhappiness for the elder generation. We can approach this question in two ways. In the first place, in China, although we pride ourselves on our virtue, i...