403
is starkly countered by David Arkush's study of Hebei village opera in the twenties. Concluding his perceptive study of the underside of China's recent history, Arkush observes that, at least in rural northern China, 'the moral categories and values of the ruling elites did not totally dominate the thinking of the subordinate classes', (p. 105). The illustrations presented to support this claim reveal not only a rupture in thought but also in language. How true was this of the pre-Republican period? Do these folk themes reflect a popular contrapuntal, an unprinted Zhuangziese, which actually questioned the values and concepts inherent in Confucian discourse?
The ‘optimistic this-worldliness' Metzger discovers as a continuous element of Chinese scholars' historiography and cultural analysis tends to bypass Wyatt's identification of metaphysical themes which, though 'premodern', are still approached without intellectual incredulity by some of these same scholars. Metzger recognizes this fact, but believes that an issue more important than general philosophical discussions of human nature is the actual production of ‘self-propelled adults' in Chinese society, (p. 284). These morally autonomous leaders are in fact the reason why China could maintain its cultural continuity as well as uphold a normative vision of culture for her future generations. Whether in premodern China or in Mao's Republic, this salient feature of the morally autonomous individual can be observed. Metzger draws this to a point by announcing that modern China has 'fully merged with liberalism and humanism', (p. 288).
This evaluation is explicitly denied by Leo Ou-Fan Lee, who carefully distinguishes between the adoption of 'historical modernism' by Chinese intellectuals in the twentieth century (i.e. progressive history) and their general irresponsiveness to Western 'esthetic modernism', (pp. 109 ff). Examples of the latter are few and far between, as Jeffrey Kinkey's study of a young writer in the eighties affirms. Metzger was more reserved in his judgement earlier in his essay, admitting that China, following Alistair McIntyre's criteria for modernity, had only committed herself to socialism and not to existentialism or some form of ethical scepticism, (pp. 269, 279). Metzger's promotion of an ‘anti-teleological' historical methodology as the proper tool for more critical studies of China by Chinese intellectuals flies in the face of Lee's awareness of the salient historically progressive element in China's modern consciousness. The suggestion may well be beneficial, but it sets up a tension between Chinese and non-Chinese forms of modernity. It seems a poignant truth that
403
is starkly countered by David Arkush's study of Hebei village opera in the twenties. Concluding his perceptive study of the underside of China's recent history, Arkush observes that, at least in rural northern China, 'the moral categories and values of the ruling elites did not totally dominate the thinking of the subordinate classes', (p. 105). The illustrations presented to support this claim reveal not only a rupture in thought but also in language. How true was this of the pre-Republican period? Do these folk themes reflect a popular contrapuntal, an unprinted Zhuangziese, which actually questioned the values and concepts inherent in Confucian discourse?
The ‘optimistic this-worldliness' Metzger discovers as a continuous element of Chinese scholars' historiography and cultural analysis tends to bypass Wyatt's identification of metaphysical themes which, though 'premodern', are still approached without intellectual incredulity by some of these same scholars. Metzger recognizes this fact, but believes that an issue more important than general philosophical discussions of human nature is the actual production of ‘self propelled adults' in Chinese society, (p. 284). These morally autonomous leaders are in fact the reason why China could maintain its cultural continuity as well as uphold a normative vision of culture for her future generations. Whether in premodern China or in Mao's Republic, this salient feature of the morally autonomous individual can be observed. Metzger draws this to a point by announcing that modern China has 'fully merged with liberalism and humanism', (p. 288).
This evaluation is explicitly denied by Leo Ou-Fan Lee, who carefully distinguishes between the adoption of 'historical modernism' by Chinese intellectuals in the twentieth century (i.e. progressive history) and their general irresponsiveness to Western 'esthetic modernism', (pp. 109 ff). Examples of the latter are few and far between, as Jeffrey Kinkey's study of a young writer in the eighties affirms. Metzger was more reserved in his judgement earlier in his essay, admitting that China, following Alistair McIntyre's criteria for modernity, had only committed herself to socialism and not to existentialism or some form of ethical scepticism, (pp. 269, 279). Metzger's promotion of an ‘anti-teleological' historical methodology as the proper tool for more critical studies of China by Chinese intellectuals flies in the face of Lee's awareness of the salient historically progressive element in China's modern consciousness. The suggestion may well be beneficial, but it sets up a tension between Chinese and non-Chinese forms of modernity. It seems a poignant truth that
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.