1978 Synthetic Writers

Chapter 545 Using every possible means to slander

The wave of discussion sparked by "The Troubleshooters" continues.

The editorial departments of China Literature Daily and Literature and Art, as well as the Critics Association, jointly convened a seminar on "Wanzhu" novels.

The debate surrounding "The Troubleshooters" suddenly became the most important issue in the literary world.

When a song becomes popular in later generations, music critics often engage in a flurry of discussion.

It's like this these days. When a novel becomes this popular, every literary critic has to get involved, whether it's criticizing or praising, whether it's riding the wave or whatever. They always have to get involved, because that's what their job is.

Comments on "The Troubleshooters" are increasing, with criticism and praise generally split evenly. Interestingly, there is a clear age divide between the critics and the praisers: most of the critics are older, while most of the praisers are younger.

Although the older generation was conservative, their criticisms were indeed quite harsh. After all, they came from that era and were adept at political struggle. Among them, Liu Dan's criticisms were the most severe, directly labeling Jiang Xian's novels as anti-humanitarian and anti-modernization.

At this critical juncture, Jiang Xian's response was published in the China Youth Daily:

Dear readers and colleagues in the literary world, when "The Playboy" was first published in the magazine "Contemporary", I never expected it would cause such a stir.

But recently, after reading an article by Comrade Liu Dan, I never expected that a novel depicting the lives of several ordinary young people would be branded with such a heavy charge as "anti-humanitarianism and anti-modernization" by Comrade Liu Dan.

Since criticism has risen from the realm of literature to value judgment, I think it is necessary to make some clarifications.

Then, Jiang Xian sent some excerpts from the novel.

The core of Comrade Liu Dan's criticism lies in his belief that the characters in "The Troublemakers" "lack lofty ideals" and "indulge in vulgar tastes," thus violating the humanistic principles of socialist literature.

After explaining all this, Jiang Xian started cursing:
This assertion reminds me of the men with hammers in Chekhov's stories, for whom all the problems in the world seem like nails.

What is humanitarianism?

Must the humanistic spirit of literature be manifested by creating "perfect" heroic figures?

So, are the confusion, struggles, and small acts of resistance of ordinary young people who are trying to survive in the cracks of the times not worth writing about?
Is the "humanitarianism" advocated by Comrade Liu Dan a living representation of human nature, or merely a specimen filtered through ideology?
I admit that the protagonists in "The Troubleshooters" may not be "noble" enough, but they truly exist. They use banter to defuse the absurdity of life and cynicism to mask their inner vulnerability.

This is precisely the common psychological state of a generation of young people when facing a rapidly changing society.

If literature cannot even face this kind of truth, how can it talk about "humanitarianism"?
Even more interesting is Comrade Liu Dan's assertion that the novel is linked to "anti-modernization".

Following this logic, does depicting human alienation in the process of modernization mean opposing modernization itself?

So I'd like to ask, does Kafka writing *The Metamorphosis* mean he opposed industrial civilization? Does Camus writing *The Stranger* represent his resistance to modernity?
So I would like to ask, does Lu Xun's writing of "The True Story of Ah Q" and "Xianglin's Wife" signify a regression and degeneration of his thought, and does Mao Dun's writing of "Midnight" signify his promotion of the capitalist path?
Comrade Liu Dan's criticism reveals a deeply ingrained linear way of thinking:

Any work that cannot directly sing praises of modernization is anti-modernization.

In physics, there is an electronic device made of semiconductor material called a diode. A diode has two electrodes: a positive electrode, also called an anode, and a negative electrode, also called a cathode.

When a forward voltage is applied between the two terminals of a diode, the diode conducts.

When a reverse voltage is applied, the diode is cut off.

Diodes can be found in common radio circuits, as well as in other household appliances and industrial control circuits.

I really want to ask, did Comrade Liu Dan also have a diode inserted in his brain? Otherwise, how could his mind be so ridiculously filled with black-and-white binary oppositions!
In my view, this "diode thinking" is precisely the biggest enemy of literary creation.

True writers should record the real situation of people in the wave of modernization, including the wrinkles and shadows that are ignored by mainstream narratives.

Finally, I'd like to mention an interesting phenomenon I've noticed:
The reviews of "The Troubleshooters" show a clear age divide.

Older critics tend to be negative, while younger readers and commentators generally resonate with the novel. This generational difference is perhaps more worthy of discussion than the novel itself.

The older generation of comrades experienced a unique historical period and developed a fixed system of literary evaluation. When they use this system to judge the works of the new generation, cognitive biases are inevitable, just as using the standards for judging classical oil paintings to evaluate Impressionism can only lead to misunderstandings.

Our generation grew up in the cultural environment of reform and opening up, and our ways of perceiving the world and our habits of expression are very different from those of the older generation.

When Comrade Liu Dan criticized the novel for its "vulgar language" and "shallow ideas," he may not have realized that this was precisely how the younger generation was resisting false sublimity—deconstructing grand narratives with everyday language and relieving the pressure of survival with dark humor.

I didn't find the fair and well-intentioned criticism from the older generation of critics harsh; on the contrary, I felt warmed by it and humbly accepted it.

Comrade Liu Dan has never written a novel, yet he harbors such great malice towards "The Troublemakers," resorting to fabricating rumors. This perfectly exemplifies the saying "literary figures belittle each other."

Could it be that being in a high position and living too comfortably allows one to speak so casually about "it's easy to talk when you're not in the same boat"?

True modernization begins with the modernization of people; it's about allowing young people to say, "I don't believe it." When literature is turned into propaganda, how can one not feel they are opposing modernization? Now, young people writing the truth are considered rebellious?
I can't help but recall Mr. Lu Xun's saying, "Using a big flag as a tiger's skin."

Comrade Liu Dan waved the banner of "humanitarianism," but what he did was the most inhumane thing—stifling vibrant literature with rigid dogma.

Let's be clear about this today, so that readers can see who is acting against humanity and who is turning back the clock of history.

By the way, let me tell you a secret: our generation of writers doesn't care about your criticism at all. The more furious you get, the more it proves we've hit a nerve. You can continue your denunciation performance, while we—will continue writing. As for those two labels you sent—"anti-humanitarian" and "anti-modernization"? Keep them for yourself; they suit your temperament perfectly.

Your modern narrative of "reporting only good news and not bad news" is, in my opinion, nothing more than the self-deceiving eunuchs of the feudal era!

"."

As Lu Xun once said, "No matter how powerful your backing is, you must speak to me politely. I generally don't cause trouble, but if I do, it's not a problem, it's news."

Writers have always been a rather individualistic group. They often disagree with certain comments and publish articles to argue with them. This has always been common in the literary world and is still prevalent in today's literary world. Not to mention today, even in the future, Han Han has also argued with various comments quite a bit.

Jiang Xian, being a literary master, couldn't be too vulgar when he was arguing. He had to use carefully chosen words. Lu Xun's lines, such as "Those bastards must have bad tempers, they won't be satisfied unless they're beaten" and "Recently I've been thinking of looking at ancient books and making some books to dig up the ancestral graves of those bad seeds," were already quite excessive.

He was objective and calm, and directly used the term "diode" to summarize Liu Dan's work.

Although in the end, he lost his composure and uttered a phrase that included the image of a "feudal-era eunuch who burys his head in the sand."
Swoosh swoosh swoosh.

After reading the article, Liu Dan was so angry that he tore the newspaper to shreds. However, even though the newspaper was torn, the words "eunuch" and "using a big flag to make a tiger's skin" were still clearly visible on it.

He dominates the commentary world by using his skills in sensationalism and riding the wave of trending topics. Having been in the commentary world for so many years, he understands the importance of going against the grain and expressing opinions that differ from mainstream public opinion. He is often praised for his insightful and far-sighted views.

In addition, Liu Dan particularly liked to comment on the literary works of established writers and write about them. These writers would often be mindful of their own status and maintain a magnanimous demeanor, otherwise they would be accused of being arrogant and conceited.

Relying on this point, Liu Dan published several "major" works in the literary world, and his literary status rose accordingly. He has never suffered a defeat.

Who would have thought that writing an article for Jiang Xian would backfire so badly? I never expected that Jiang Xian, this writer, would be so difficult to deal with, and that he would call me a grandson by name in the article.

"Fight back! I will fight back!"

Liu Dan was furious, knowing full well that if he didn't respond, he would be banned from the literary circle and would be ridiculed wherever he went.

The old comrade lowered his blood pressure and calmed himself down. After racking his brains, he quickly produced another scathing article, ready to start another war of words with Jiang Xian.

However, a verbal fight can only be called a verbal fight if the two sides are evenly matched.

They insult you mercilessly, but you insult them back for ages, like scratching an itch through a boot—completely ineffective and utterly powerless.

How can you even start arguing about this?

Jiang Xian's actions weren't just directed at Liu Dan. He thought to himself that if he were to rise to a higher position in the future, his status would restrict his freedom of speech.

Let's take advantage of this moment and deliver a decisive blow to avoid a hundred more.

One short essay after another was published. Faced with these old fogies in the literary world who relied on their seniority, Jiang Xian showed no respect for the elderly and refused to give them the right to act arrogantly.

"On the surface, it is a difference in literary concepts, but in fact it exposes a worrying trend in contemporary literary criticism—I call it 'eunuch-like' criticism."

"You criticize 'The Troubleshooters' for lacking idealism, but do you know that those seemingly cynical young people in the novel are precisely the ones least willing to lie?"

"Literary history tells us that all attempts to establish strict rules and regulations for literature have ultimately failed. Zhong Rong's 'Poetry Ranks' from the Southern Dynasties divided poets into three, six, and nine grades, but who remembers those 'superior' poets today? On the contrary, Tao Yuanming, who was listed as 'middle grade,' has been remembered for eternity. Jin Shengtan's abridgment of 'Water Margin' in the 10th century, thinking he was defending moral purity, only revealed the narrowness of his criticism."

"Comrade Liu Dan has been very busy lately, busy tearing up newspapers, busy writing manifestos, and busy labeling young writers. Unfortunately, there is one thing he is not busy with—writing novels."

"A person who has never written a novel wields the big stick of 'literary criticism' and points fingers at other people's works. This reminds me of a joke: a eunuch teaching people how to give birth."

The articles infuriated a group of veteran critics, leaving them utterly defeated and disorganized. They were furious, their faces contorted with rage, and given their advanced age, they wondered how many years they would lose to survive.

Jiang Xian engaged in a fierce debate with the scholars, defeating them all and enjoying the insults immensely, rediscovering some of the thrill of online arguments he once felt.

Under his leadership, young critics launched a counterattack, and soon a large number of novels with positive reviews of "The Troubleshooters" emerged.

These positive reviews were just as intense as the negative ones.

In his article "The Significance of the Playboys," writer Bai Ye argues that the characters Yu Guan, Ma Qing, and Yang Chong in "The Playboys" are more accurately described as "prodigal sons." Through these "prodigal sons," Jiang Xian "fully expresses his own understanding and feelings about the complex social reality, giving the work a wonderful charm where humor and satire become literature, which can resonate with the audience and lead them from lighthearted viewing to deep reflection. Thus, through the emotions, experiences, and fates of the familiar yet unfamiliar 'prodigal sons,' people can think about various issues in the changing social life."

"Jiang Xian's 'The Troublemakers' has created a new literary style with its unique style and theme. This literary style has had a profound impact on the literary world and will surely provide new creative ideas and directions for future writers. This is part of the liberation of thought. Opposing 'The Troublemakers' is opposing modernization."

Chen Xiaoming, a professor in the Chinese Department at Peking University, defines the significance of "The Mischievous Ones" as the impact of "subculture" on mainstream culture, and published an article entitled "Subculture: The Vital Force of the Mischievous Ones".

"They are restless souls in the city, rebels and challengers of our time. They carry the fantasies of a commodity society and the drive of life, running wildly across the fields of life. This is the landscape of our time. It is not magnificent, but it is full of the primal tension of life."

Of course, there were also those who stood up to criticize Liu Dan on behalf of Jiang Xian. A reporter named Zuo Shula asked, "On the one hand, Liu Dan basically denies the critical value of 'The Troubleshooters' to reality and intentionally or unintentionally tries to suppress the cognitive value of the novel; on the other hand, he painstakingly distorts the creative intention of the novel and does everything he can to slander it. This kind of criticism is not literary criticism, but literary opportunism, the impotent rage of a spiritually impotent person!"

As the controversy surrounding "The Troubleshooters" reached its peak, an uninvited guest also arrived at Jiang Xian's home.

(End of this chapter)