One day in 1956, in new york, united states, 65-year-old hu hae and historians talked about it, and it inevitably fell on lu xian. Both sides of the taiwan straits of public opinion have long been against each other: the mainland has given lu qu’s name as a left-wing cultural flag-bearer, a spiritual fighter, and hu qi has been branded as a “capitalist liberalist”; and overseas schools have promoted hu qi’s idea of freedom, while deliberately avoiding his left-wing tendencies, as if they were divided into two large camps. In the face of conspiracies, hu chi said, “lu xian is a liberal who will never yield to outside power, and lu xian is one of us.”
There are also researchers who believe that the hymens are based on their independent personality rather than their theoretical identity. In his late years, hu said that “ruo xuan is a liberal and will never yield to foreign forces” from the point of view of his swift refusal to adhere to power and to maintain a critical stance, rather than recognizing him as a liberal camp。
This sentence, which transcends a half-life of bitterness, hides the spiritual consensus of the country’s two great literary craftsmen, and has also served as an example of china’s most precious intellectuals in recent times – an independent personality, a free mind, and a lack of subordination to power。
One, five, four, one hand: a common beginning from new youth
The clash between hu xi and lu xuan began in 1918 with a dramatic movement of five or four new cultures. Upon his return from school in the united states in 1917, hu hui, age 26, was hired as a professor at beijing university to take part in and promote a new cultural movement, a white word campaign horned by a book entitled " literary improvement " (published on 1 january 1917 in new youth, vol. Ii, no. 5), to break the shackles of old literature with fresh and sharp ideas, and in 1918, a 37-year-old ruthun came out with the mad diary, with sharp pens to tear up the eaters' veil. The two authors, the core authors of new youth, are comrades who fight side by side on the road to enlightenment and enjoy each other, without any differences。
In the early days of the new cultural movement, they had the same goal: to overthrow the shackles of the feudal culture, to open up the minds of the people in white words and to save the backward old china with the inspiration of thought. Hu xian has never been supplicate for lu xian's talents, and his acclaimed academic work, the sileu of chinese novels, is “the creation of an open mountain, first-class work” (from the 1922 encyclopedia of hu xian, tsao, anhu education press, 2001), which recognizes this as a landmark in chinese classical novels。
In 1922, in his letter to hu chi, he stated that he was a man of his own words and that he was a man of great admiration for chen's work and knowledge in the new cultural movement. One is the champion of ideas for improvement, and the other is the literary champions who hit the roots of the disease, who were truly peers in the sense that together took the first step towards the liberation of modern chinese ideas。
Ii. Ten years of war: discrepancies in the path, but maintaining the bottom line
After 1925, china’s social situation was so volatile that the flood of the times pushed intellectuals to different choices, and hu xi and lu xian became enemies from their side-to-side comrades to their pen-to-hand public debates for more than a decade。
The central difference between the two is that the road between "progressive improvement" and "revolutionary revolution" is a struggle: hu has always insisted on moderate improvement, arguing that china's problems need to be optimized at the educational, institutional and cultural levels, that radical revolutionary movements should be opposed and that social progress should be promoted in a rational and peaceful manner, and that he hated the old china's corruption and believed firmly in its national ills and the shackles of feudalism, and that all improvements would never be broken without thorough criticism and revolution。
The contradiction of the concept has turned into an incoherence of the pen, which has always been strung out, with numerous writings pointing directly to the ideas and choices: on march 26th, 1933, lu xuan published "the secrets of declaring-liberal talk" in which he denounced the dictums about japan's imperialism and stated that it was “satisfied with japanese imperialism”. (fortified in 1933, the declaration-liberty talks, 26 march, are recorded in the lu xuantuan-philiptical freedom book.) during the same period, lu xianxiu wrote, as amended by lu xian, the royal poetry, more directly referring to the political options of the latter period (originally, 1933, the declaration-live speech, 6 march, is recorded in the luxuant-philipse)。
In the face of a decade of criticism by lu, the attitude is unexpected to all: a life without response, without verbal abuse, without reprisals, always with respect to the human ethos and the bottom line. Even when he was in the vortex of public opinion, he had never vilified lu xian for personal hatred, but had come forward to defend him after his death。
On 19 october 1936, lu xian died. Just a month later, the female writer susherin published several articles that struck ruther in a vicious attack and condemned him as “a disgrace to the slims”. Upon learning of it, hu chi sent a letter that was harshly stopped, in which he clearly stated: “everyone must be equal. And love knows its evil, and evil knows its beauty, and is equal. Lu xuan has his strengths, such as his early literary work, such as his novel history study, which is a top job
Can this kind of accommodation, which does not deny the power of others because of political differences, and does not break the threshold of judgement because of personal grievances, be said to be a rare source for a human being。
Iii. Late-age findings: penetrating political fog and seeing the spiritual nature
In the 1950s, the ideological antagonism between the two sides of the taiwan straits left hu chi and lu xuan completely marked against each other and their minds and personalities were cut apart. According to some, the 1956 phrase, "lu xuan is one of us," was not just a talk, but rather a spiritual endorsement of lu xian after leaving all the blame behind。
(i) can it be said that “we” in the mouth of hu chi is not a political camp but a group of intellectuals who adhere to independent ideas, free personality and dare to judge reality。
Lu xuan has remained independent and has never bowed to any outside power or power。
In his life, lu xin carried out this independence: during the time of the government of the north ocean, he criticized the dictatorship of the warlord and refused to pull and buy the official arena; under the high-handed rule of the nationalist party, he did not fear threats and wrote about the dark and authoritarian nature of society; and in later years, even when he was close to the left, he kept thinking independently, without attachment or blindness, and looked at society and the human nature in his own eyes。
The idea of freedom of thought and the emphasis on intellectuals to remain independent and the swiftness of the hard-bone spirit of “cool to a thousand” may be why he sees it as a “sympathetic”。
(ii) beyond political differences: fear of criticism and recognition of literary values
Hu ji did not reject the value of the swift because of differences in political positions. He has always acknowledged the two indelible contributions of ruth: first, literary and academic achievements, from the creation of the modern white novels of the madman's diary a q, to the closing of the academic gap in china's novel sileen, whose creation and research are the culmination of modern chinese literature; and, secondly, the scarcity of social criticism, in the midst of civil strife in which most of the people, or those who are dependent on them, or who hide themselves from the world, whose courage and commitment have been to confront the dark, dissect and awaken the people。
Hu xi once said, “tolerance is more important than freedom” (resulting from “tolerance and freedom”, published in 1959, in volume 11 of the hu chin collection, beijing university press, 1998), which is an accommodation of different ideas, while ruxuan immediately said, “let them be angry, and i will not forgive a single one” (resulting from “death” , a collection of lu xuantou's essays, people's literary press, 2005), which does not condone the dark reality. The two seemingly opposing points of view were designed to safeguard freedom, conscience and justice and to support the spiritual backbone of recent intellectuals。
(iii) breaking label solidification
It can be said that, for some time, lu was shaped into a left-wing cultural symbol, hu ji was defined as a representative of bourgeois liberalism, and both were cut to two sides. The old age view of hu chi seems to break this labeled interpretation: lu xuan has never belonged to a political camp, and he belongs to all intellectuals who seek independence of thought, freedom of personality, and dare to judge reality。
In spite of the differences between politics and roads, monotheistic intellectuals, huxi and luxuan may be among the same people -- with the heart to save the country, with the uncompromising line of personality, are committed to breaking the mindset and awakening the nation's souls。
Iv. Conclusion: the two focuss, the first
Can it be said that hu xian and luxuan are two examples of civil intellectuals: whispering is warm water, trying slowly to heal the cracks of society in a rational, inclusive and progressive manner, and rutherly is a sharp knife that pierces the darkness and numbness of the times in a sober, resolute and thoroughly critical manner。
They have chosen different paths, with different ideas, even ink-for-hand, and a half-life of argument, but in the bones they may be united: to save china with the power of thought, to keep their conscience firm with the human ethos, and never give up their quest for freedom, independence and light。
They may have different positions and opposite paths, but they may be the same with regard to the spiritual background of independence, free thought and critical conscience。
