The Restatement Of May 4～(th) Movement And An Investigation Of Contemporary Chinese Literature's Legitimization

Regarding the restatement of May 4^th as historical clue, this thesis discusses an important problem of contemporary Chinese literature's legitimization. And then, it gives an explanation for the turn of history in 1940s and the birth of contemporary literature. In general, on the basis of different narration about May 4^th Movement, especially in the period of Yan'an literature, the paper reveal that the ideological context which come from literary turn has an important influence on the development and interpretation of literary history. The thesis has been divided into six parts as follow:Introduction: legitimization and contemporary Chinese literature's tradition. Contemporary Chinese literature's legitimization was regarded as a critical problem. Constructing great tradition is very important to contemporary Chinese literature.Part 2: to interpret the concept and meaning of restatement of May 4^th. The restatement of May 4^th is a problem that Mao and other authorities critics' different interpretation and evaluation about May 4^th Movement from the people in May 4^th period. The restatement of Yan'an about May 4^th has invented a tradition for contemporary Chinese literature, so that the new people's literature receives its legitimization.Part 3: to restate historic truth of May 4^th. The narration of people in left-wing or Yan'an period about May 4^th has a trait: it ignore its meaning of Chinese new cultural movement which is the May 4^th's wider meaning. On the contrary, it outstand a narrower one that is just about May 4^th Movement. Similarly, the left-wing literature has a selective memory bout May 4^th. The example as follow: the outstanding of June 3^rd Movement; development of workers' movements after May 4^th ; and the establishment of Chinese Communist Party.Part 4: to restate historic meaning of May 4^th. On the basis of the concept of representation, we can see that different ideologies can make different meaning about May 4^th. The issue of May 4^th 's nature and hegemony can represent this point. In the period of May 4^th, as Hushi and Zhou Zuoren, or other people say, the nature and hegemony of May 4^th is out of question, they absolutely belong to the bourgeoisie. This nature has not change in the narration of revolutionary literature in 1920s and left-wing literature in 1930s.but in the narration of Yan'an literature in 1940s, the nature has changed to a part of proletariat world revolution.Part 5: to restate historic value of May 4^th. In the period of May 4^th, the May 4^th was regarded liberalism, individualism, and enlightenment. However, as the Mao Zedong and other people concerned, that narration is not true. In the period of Yan'an literature, the liberalism was eliminated because it was regarded as bourgeoisie ideology, and the narration of democracy and science was replaced by anti-imperialism and anti- feudalism; individualism was regarded the birth of evils, so it was criticized and eliminated, and then replaced by collective; the enlightenment also has a turn, the body of enlightenment has to be enlightened.Conclusion: the anxiety of influence and the paradox of history. As a great tradition, May 4^th gave contemporary Chinese literature legitimization. For this reason, Yan'an has to misread and underrate May 4^th deliberately. Making May 4^th to be a part of tradition, contemporary Chinese literature receives its legitimization. As the development of New Democracy historical view, contemporary Chinese literature's May 4^th tradition was outstand in many literary history books. And then, the doubt from different period has played a part of the paradox of history.