对毛泽东时代话语的一种厚重描述:以赵树理为例(英文)

Towards a Thick Description of Maoist Discourse: With Help from Zhao Shuli

在当今世界对现代中国的知识生产中,毛泽东时代要么被忽视,要么被妖魔化;而在文化领域内,提起"十七年文学"或上世纪六七十年代的文学时,事态也不见更好。对这激进时代的否定可谓是当代东方主义式汉学的关键内容,但当下学界也有一种试图恢复并重建的努力,将毛泽东时代的追求作为一种另类的农业社会的现代性,对其复杂性加以探讨。本文试图从福柯理论与马克思主义的角度研读毛泽东时代的话语方式,将所述时代置于其自身的语境阐释其生产力与主体性,以区别于当下将这一时代置于冷战-殖民观念之下的阐释视野。赵树理小说创作为我们从文化哲学层面阐释这个时代提供了理想的个案,本文第二部分即以赵树理的短篇小说为例。作者认为赵树理的小说,以其具有高度政治复杂性的艺术自觉,成为了真正意义上的"政治挂帅"的文学。

With a few exceptions much of the knowledge of modem China produced in the world either ignores or demonizes the Mao era. On the cultural front things are not much better, whether we are speaking of the ＂Seventeen -year＇ s Literature＂ Or the culture of the 1960s and 1970s. The negation of the Mao or radical era is, in short, a crucial part of contemporary Sinological - orientalism. There is however a recovery and reorientation project underway that seeks to restore the complexity of the Mao dee- ades and its pursuit of an alternative, agrarian, and socialist modernity. As part of this project I offer an appropriately Foueanh- Jan and Marxist notion of Maoist discourse. By framing that era in terms of its past Maoist discourse we can at least begin to take the revolution and its culture more seriously in its own terms and self - understanding. This has the added advantage of explaining the productive power and subjectivity of Chinese Maoism and its culture without recourse to the Cold War/colonial notion of ＂to- talitarianism. ＂ Yet Maoist discourse, like China＇ s ＂alternative modernity,＂ remain concepts more often announced than sub- stantiated. The rich, challenging work of the rural writer Zhao Shuli offers us an ideal case study of what Maoist discourse was in cultural - philosophical terms. The second part of this essay offers a reading of selected short fiction from Zhao in terms of how it draws on and illuminates Maoist discourse, resulting in a literary art of remarkable political complexity and contextual detail. With Zhao it is ＂politics in command＂ in a genuine sense; this is not a flaw but its entire point.