Rethinking “Subjectivity” in Literature

This article delves into Liu Zaifu's theoretical construction of subjectivity and his reflections on the dominant paradigm of revolution and enlightenment in twentieth-century China. Realizing the incompleteness and insufficiency of his contemplation on individual subjectivity, Liu shifted his scholarly interests to the composition of and dialogues between multiple subjectivities and examined the complex relationship between subjects and objects, self and others, as well as the individual's psychological relationship with the self. By reframing Liu's theories on subjectivity, this article argues that he seeks to further detach literature from politics by calling for various transcendental dimensions of Chinese literary works beyond the realistic one and by paying intense attention to the literary descriptions of people's sin of complicity and their inner struggle. Liu's evocation of heart and mind formulates a new concept of interiority via connecting the Chinese traditional concept of xin with the Western concept of inner subjectivity. In this way, Liu weaves a unique discourse of interiority into Chinese literary criticism, as a complement to and critique of the enclosed narrative vision of revolution and enlightenment in modern China.

Translations, research and reception of Solzhenitsyn’s works in China

In the centre of this research is the problem of translation, study and reception of Solzhenitsyn’s works in the People’s Republic of China. A Chinese scholar of Slavic languages and literature, the author points out that Solzhenitsyn studies in China would be understandably interrupted for political reasons only to be resumed later, due to the growing interest in the writer’s works. Starting from 1963, there have been two distinct lines of study: Solzhenitsyn’s biography and his literary legacy. The first topic mainly attracts Chinese writers, historians, cultural scholars, philosophers, and professional critics; they present the readers with biographical facts in the context of the history of Soviet labour camps, dissident movement, etc. The second topic has specialists in Russian studies and foreign literature exploring the eternal topics in Solzhenitsyn’s works as well as his innovative techniques. According to the author, contemporary Chinese literary criticism is concerned with the latter area of research, while reception of Solzhenitsyn’s works is changing from negative to positive.

SPATIAL NARRATIVE IN THE WORKS OF V. S. MAKANIN: THE INVERTED AXIS OF THE UNIVERSE

The article is devoted to the analysis of the spatial structure in the works of Vladimir Makanin, in works such as “Our Way is Long...”, “Laze”, “Table covered with the cloth and with the water-bottle in the middle”, “Underground, or Hero of our time”, these texts are considered from the point of view of the concept of spatial narrative. The authors note that from the second half of the last century in the field of the humanities there was a turn in the interpretation of the function of space in the literary text, the concept “spatial narrative” was included in science. If traditional narrative theory attached great importance to temporal measurement, space was simply a background, then in many modernist and postmodern works, as the traditional interpretation of the time category was overcome, the spatial dimension took no less place in the structure of the text than the previously temporal dimension, which is observed in most of Makanin's works: being a necessary element, space participates in the promotion of the plot, the creation of character images and the organization of the form of the work itself. The writer poses the problem of maintaining individuality as a hero, his personal integrity and self-identity. In these works, Makanin creates a variety of spatial worlds in a special way, and thanks to spatial images, Makanin's heroes with varying degree of success are looking for a way to preserve their own self in this life. The article also provides a brief overview of the study of V. Makanin's work in Chinese literary criticism

Perception of works of V. Shklovsky in China

The article is devoted to studying the long-term dissemination and perception of Viktor Shklovsky's works and ideas in China from the 1930s to 2010s, while providing a brief overview of the scientific articles of Chinese Russianists, who played a key role in studying the heritage of Shklovsky conceptual apparatus in Chinese literary criticism. Particular attention is paid to the category of estrangement, firmly included in Chinese literary studies and widely used in the analysis of works of Chinese literature and cinema, have been considered such concepts of Russian formalism as literary character, reception, since the early 80s of the 20th century adopted by the science of China. The article emphasizes that the history of the perception of the theoretical views of V. Shklovsky in China includes several stages, while a true study of his works, like Russian formalism in general, begins only in the 1980s of the 20th century. The artworks of Shklovsky in China began to pay attention only to the XXI century.

Kristin Stapleton (2016). Fact in Fiction: 1920s China and Ba Jin’s Family.

There are few resources amongst contemporary Chinese literary criticism that manage to weave such insightful literary readings and incisive historical research as Kristin Stapleton’s Fact in Fiction: 1920s China and Ba Jin’s Family. The book accomplishes three feats, as set out by Stapleton in her introductory chapter, simultaneously incorporating a history of twentieth-century Chengdu (and its relevance to the developments in China during this period, more broadly) alongside the author’s biography of Ba Jin’s formative years in the city and the historiographical context of his novel Family. Such an undertaking by a less skilled author would have, perhaps, produced a work which simplifies the rich historical underpinnings of Ba Jin’s Family to supplementary readings of the novel, coupled with incidental evidence of the political and social machinations of the city in which its author grew up. Not so under Stapleton’s careful guidance. By reading the social and economic development of early twentieth-century Chengdu as much as its fictional counterpart in Ba Jin’s Turbulent Stream trilogy, Stapleton provides a perceptive reading of Family which invites the reader to consider how fiction can enrich and enliven our understanding of history.

Milton in China ‘Yet Once More’

This chapter overviews Chinese reception of Milton, with an emphasis on some of the most well-known Chinese translations of Paradise Lost. Close readings of these translations against Milton’s original demonstrate the difficulties of and resolutions for rendering Milton’s verse specific to Chinese. The subsequent discussion of the paratexts accompanying Chinese translations and of ‘introduction to world literature’ series gives a sense of the collaborative context that has shaped and continues to shape today’s general reception of Milton in China. That politically charged reception, eager to view Milton’s Satan as the embodiment of the poet’s revolutionary spirit, also dominates some recent works of Chinese literary criticism. The chapter ends by conceding that, while Milton scholarship in China has been relatively univocal and is still young, recent developments in world literature promise that innovative and intriguing work on Milton can be expected from China in the near future.