My era, 1979!

Chapter 68 "Recommendation for Exceptional Admission"

Zhang Peiheng closed Xu Chengjun's notebook, tapping the cover lightly with his fingertips: "Interesting. You didn't dwell on the authenticity of the supplementary text, but instead focused on the word 'use'. That's a clever way of thinking."

Xu Chengjun smiled and lowered his head: "Teacher Zhang is right. 'Adaptability' means that you must first understand the root of 'hidden beauty' before you can let it grow new branches today."

Zhu Dongrun nodded as well.

Faced with the academic mystery of the authenticity of the supplementary text, Xu Chengjun did not dwell on the details of textual research.

Instead, it gets straight to the point: "Regardless of whether it is Liu Xie's original text or not, the eight characters 'concealment is skillful in its repetition of meaning, and elegance is skillful in its excellence' are accurately captured."

That's ingenious.

Using examples from "Dream of the Red Chamber" such as "hidden clues" and "Daiyu burying flowers," abstract concepts are made concrete.

It demonstrates both literary skill and avoids getting bogged down in version controversies, handling complex matters with ease.

And it keeps pace with the times!
This demonstrates academic proficiency.

Xu Chengjun not only pointed out the shortcomings of contemporary literature, but also used classic cases to prove the guiding value of traditional literary theory for contemporary creation.

It responded to Zhang Peiheng's implicit question about "adaptability" and achieved "using the past to serve the present".

Wang Shuizhao thought the boy was clever.

This answer wasn't particularly amazing,

But even if he were to answer, he wouldn't be able to come up with a better answer.

So, he's inferior?

Something doesn’t seem right?
Damn it, it's fallen into the trap of comparative literature.

Floating logic!

Xu Chengjun concluded with the line, "Only by understanding the roots of 'hidden beauty' can we allow it to grow new branches today."

It's about not offending seniors while showcasing academic brilliance.

No matter the circumstances, only the intelligent can go further!
Wang Shuizhao glanced at Xu Chengjun's youthful face.

He exclaimed, "It's so good to be young."

He picked up his pen and wrote "Recommend exceptional admission" on Xu Chengjun's application form!
Su Liancheng, standing next to him, glanced at him, his lips twitched, and he also drew a checkmark.

Become!

After Zhang Peiheng finished asking his question, the other professors were also eager to join in.

The interview took on a strange shape, making it hard to tell whether it was a discussion or an interview.

However, Xu Chengjun answered "okay".

Although the five professors' questions were all closely related to their respective academic fields: classical, comparative, literary theory, history of scholarship, and contemporary criticism.

It also directly addresses the core contradictions in literature in 1979: tradition versus the West, trauma versus seeking roots, and inheritance versus innovation.

However, Xu Chengjun's answer always followed the logic of "tradition as the root, the West as the application, and responding to the times".

It draws on classical texts while also being grounded in reality.

It demonstrates both forward-thinking vision and academic rigor.

How can we be rigorous?

That is: do not deny the value of either side, but only talk about "how to use it well".

To put it bluntly, it's called academic "muddying the waters." For example...

Zhu Dongrun asked: "Xiao Xu, you said that traditional culture is a 'living tree.' Qu Yuan 'expressed his feelings with indignation' in 'Li Sao,' and contemporary scar literature 'expresses pain through pain.' Both seem to be emotional catharsis, but the ancients said that 'expressing one's feelings with indignation' should 'draw inspiration from poetry and use analogies,' while contemporary works are mostly direct accusations. What do you think is the significance of the traditional 'theoretic system' for healing contemporary literary trauma?"

Zhu Dongrun contrasts Qu Yuan's "Li Sao" with "expressing emotions through indignation" and contemporary "scar literature" with "recounting pain through pain".

It directly addresses the core contradiction between "traditional lyrical wisdom and contemporary literary expression of trauma".

how to answer?

Break down the fundamental differences between "ancient lyrical style" and "contemporary straightforward accusation"!

Xu Chengjun replied: "Professor Zhu has hit the nail on the head. Qu Yuan's 'indignation' was never raw emotion. The pain of 'resentment against the spirits' in 'Li Sao' is wrapped in the metaphor of 'fragrant herbs and beautiful women,' just like wrapping a raging fire in orchids. The pain is real, but with the texture of culture, it is not just tearing, but also has a sweet aftertaste."

What is the essence of the "traditional lyrical narrative"?
Emotions are wrapped in the texture of culture, and pain has a sweet aftertaste!

"The current 'scar literature' dares to confront trauma, which is courageous, but it lacks a bit of 'restraint'."

"For example, when writing about the hardships of educated youth sent to the countryside, if we learn from the analogy in the Chu Ci, we can use 'the weeds have no hoe' to represent 'youth buried in the yellow earth,' and 'a broken bowl filled with frost' to represent 'difficulty in getting three meals a day.' This not only preserves the pain but also allows readers to taste a deeper bitterness through association. This is not to weaken the emotion but to give the trauma cultural weight."

Finally, he resorted to trickery.

It respects the courage of "scar literature" while also pointing out its room for improvement, maintaining a dialectical and non-extreme attitude.

Jia Zhi asked: "You said that comparative literature should 'use our own treasures for dialogue,' but Voltaire adapted 'The Orphan of Zhao' into 'The Chinese Orphan,' adding a 'love story' and deleting the 'revenge ending,' saying that this reflects 'China's spirit of benevolent governance.' Doesn't this kind of adaptation count as 'random comparison'? How should we treat 'Chinese stories' as seen by outsiders?"

Since you say that comparative literature is based on unfounded logic.

Then let's see how well you've established your cultural stance.

Xu Chengjun replied, “Professor Jia’s example is brilliant. Voltaire’s adaptation is not exactly a ‘random comparison,’ but it is a ‘dialogue with a filter.’ He wants to use a Chinese story to tell his own ‘rationalism,’ just as I use the Western ‘iceberg principle’ to tell the story of ‘Hidden Beauty.’ It’s just a matter of each taking what they need.”

Old Jia, you're awesome!
First, give them a compliment!

Professor Zhang taught me!
"The key is that we must first clarify the 'roots' of our own treasure: The core of 'The Orphan of Zhao' is not 'benevolent governance,' but the loyalty of 'a scholar will die for one who understands him,' and the complexity of 'humanity revealed in revenge.'"

"Whether outsiders make good or bad revisions is not important. What is important is that we can clearly explain 'what the original text is.' Just like when Westerners study 'Dream of the Red Chamber,' some say it is a 'family novel,' and some say it is a 'love tragedy.' We don't need to rush to deny it. As long as we explain 'the interpersonal relationships in the Grand View Garden contain Chinese family ethics,' they will naturally see a more complete China through comparison. This is 'dialogue,' not 'being interpreted.'"

The core here is still about refining the methodology.

Taking Western studies of "Dream of the Red Chamber" as an example, Xu Chengjun proposed the principle of dialogue: "Don't rush to deny foreign interpretations, but thoroughly explain the local context."

This elevates comparative literature to "equal dialogue" rather than "passive interpretation," echoing the advocacy of "using our own treasures for dialogue."

This does not contradict Jia Zhifang's ideals and original intentions.

One word: Brilliant!

Wang Shuizhao asked, "In the context of 'academic genealogy charts,' how should we position 'Western theories' and 'traditional literary theories' in modern and contemporary literary studies?"

Xu Chengjun replied: "Treat Western theories as 'tools' and traditional literary theories as 'foundation'. Western theories can be listed at the 'methodological level,' clearly indicating 'which ones can solve Chinese problems'; traditional literary theories can be listed at the 'foundational level,' clearly indicating 'which ones represent the underlying aesthetic characteristics of the nation'."

Su Liancheng asked, "How can literature both 'find its roots' and 'eliminate its flaws'? We can't just hold onto dross as if it were a treasure, can we?"

Xu Chengjun replied: "Tracing one's roots is by no means 'restoring the past,' it's 'panning for gold.' Traditional culture has never been pure gold, it's 'gold dust mixed with mud and sand': Confucius's 'benevolence and love for others' is gold, the rigidity of the 'Three Cardinal Guides and Five Constant Virtues' is mud and sand; the 'deepest affection' in 'The Peony Pavilion' is gold, the oppression of 'parents' orders' is mud and sand. The role of literature is to 'sift gold and remove sand': when writing about tracing one's roots, one should not only convey the gold like Shen Congwen wrote about the 'simple and honest people' in western Hunan, but also remove the sand like Ba Jin wrote about the 'feudal shackles' in 'Family'."

At this point, the interview is basically over.

Anything else to say?
Asking about academic matters?
Asking about field of vision?
Asking about the basics?

Is it still not clear?
Little Lao Tzu gets big points!
　That's it, that's it. Whether you like it or not, it's gone. Don't rush me to put it on sale. Let me stay on the new book list for a few more days. Wouldn't it be better if you could read it for free for a few more days? It's free! You all know how bad this book is. Not many people can get into it. The readership is terrible! Fortunately, the readers who did get into it are quite supportive. They gave it a lot of monthly votes, which is why it's doing so well now! It should be available for sale next week, around the 21st.

　　
　
(End of this chapter)