The Method And Position Of "Narrating China"

Since 1980 s,a large number of Chinese scholars living overseas introduced the research findings in modern Chinese literature to Chinese Mainland.These research findings have great impact on traditional views of mainland academic circle for their fresh theoretical perspectives,and arouse wide attention and continuous discussion.Among the Chinese scholars living overseas,Der-wei Wang is one of the outstanding scholars,exemplary and representative.In this paper,as a case study of Wang,focused on his "the modernity of the late Qing Dynasty ","Lyric Tradition and Chinese modernity" and "Sinophone Literature”,three of the most influential discourse.It analyzed from an overall perspective,seeking the identity of various academic proposition;and discuss it separately one by one;so as to reveal the method and position of Wang in this process.This paper is composed of six parts:The first chapter is to generally reveal the method and position of Wang,namely “Narrating China”.“Narrating China” is a “prototype code” which is mentioned repeatedly in Wang's literature research.He proposed a series of academic proposition,theory and creative discourse framework which could be regarded as derivation and extension of the "Narrating China”."Narrating China" has multiple meanings,including "looking at China from fictions" "fictional China" and "deconstructing China".The dialogical imagination of history,the freedom of difference for literature,and the decentering “China” constitute the theory,ethics and geography of “Narrating China”.The second chapter re-examines David Der-wei Wang's exposition of “the modernity of the late Qing Dynasty”.First of all,the dissertation attempts to demonstrate that David Der-wei Wang's positioning and description of the “repressed modernities”of late Qing Dynasty are always opposite to the May Fourth Literature.Therefore,the aspects of the late Qing Dynasty constructed by him are argumentative in nature.Secondly,the dissertation connects Wang's studies on the late Qing Dynasty novels,the realistic literature and the contemporary novel criticism,after which,the formation of the “Modernity of the Late Qing Dynasty” is discussed.At the same time,it is pointed out that Wang has constructed a responsive relation between the novels in the end of the 19 th Century and the novels in the end of 20 th Century in China,which is not a strict historical analysis but an allegorically historical discussion.Putting together the “Pre-revolution” literature and the “Post-revolution” literature,Wang has depicted a historical allegory of “ Farewell to the Revolution”.The third chapter discusses David Der-wei Wang's exposition of “lyric”.His conception of “lyric” can be regarded as another type of proposition of the “repressed modernity”,which is also a kind of scheme of “the novel in China”.The dialogue between “lyric” and “epic” is the way in which David Der-wei Wang reexamines the history of literature.Through this dialogue,he queries not only the spirit of “obsession with China” represented by “epic” but also the Chinese modernity expressed by “enlightenment” and “revolution” on the side of “epic”;at the same time,he is intended to disrupt the unidirectional line of the literary history.David Der-wei Wang's “tradition of lyric” is just a modern “invention”;his problem awareness comes from Paul A.Cohen's “China-centered approach” and also from Prasenjit Duara's “Rescuing history from the nation”.In David Der-wei Wang's mind,“lyric” represents the ethic of literature,and “epic” stands for the monster of history.The fourth chapter elaborates David Der-wei Wang's discussion of “Sinophone Literature”.The final form of “the novel in China” is the uproar of many voices in “China”,which means a decentralized world of Chinese literature with multiple dialogues.Considering that the concepts of “modern Chinese Literature” and “world Chinese Literature” have been unable to adapt to this requirement,David Der-wei Wang in turn sought a more comprehensive and more flexible theoretical framework---“Sinophone Literature”.This concept was originated by Shu-mei Shih and was later borrowed by David Der-wei Wang,but their methods and standpoints are different.Shu-mei Shih takes “post-colony” as the theoretical supposition and practical standpoint of “Sinophone”;while David Der-wei Wang reconstructs “Sinophone” from the perspective of “post-loyalist”.The fifth chapter is to analyze Wang in the overseas Sinology academic pedigree of Hsia Chih-tsing and Leo Lee,and state the influence of three on Chinese mainland modern literature research.In recent thirty years,the study of modern Chinese literature abroad has its internal dialectical development,and the research paradigm of literary history in Chinese mainland has also changed several times.In 1980 s,Hsia Chih-tsing made an start to it by writing The History of Chinese Modern Fiction,which in a way encouraged the upsurge of mainland scholars "Rewriting Literary History",and promoted the transform of literary history from "revolution" paradigm to "modernization" paradigm.In 1990 s,Leo Lee and Wang became the backbone of modern literature research.Through repeated inquiries on modernity of Chinese literature,they promote the transform of "Modernity" paradigm on study of literary history,and first open the reflection of modern narrative.In the sixth chapter,it studies Wang's concept through horizontal comparison.Through the comparison between Wang and Zhang Xudong's discourse on “May Fourth”,two apparently different “China” narration tendencies are presented.Wang tends to decentering the May Fourth,while Zhang Xudong wanted to reestablish the significance of the modern origin of May Fouth.This reflects the two methods of imagining China: Der-wei Wang showed "centrifugal" tendency,and tried to eliminating the integrity of history;while Zhang Xudong showed "centripetal" tendencies,committed to the reconstruction of the integrity of history,aiming to reconstruct the Chinese identity in the context of globalization and Postmodernism.In this paper,the comparison of Wang and Zhang Xudong is not only for deepening the understanding of Wang by identifying the differences,but also to seek for the possibility of finding another theory to go beyond Wang's “Narrating China”,including the re-imagination of integrality of history of literature and the expectancy of metamorphosis of research paradigm.