Frankfurt Consensus

For too long the specter of Darwinism has haunted the narrative of Chinese literary history. It is told as a story of "evolution," a triumphant confluence of folk and vernacular literature, along a chain of genre development from dynasty to dynasty. The 1917 New Culture Movement is seen as the teleo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers of literary studies in China no. 4; pp. 507 - 509
Main Author 柏睿晨 孙康宜 冯铁 高利克 葛浩德 金洙京 朗宓榭 林立 林香伶 林宗正 罗然 梅道芬 钱南秀 施吉瑞 孙之梅 吴盛青 杨吴昇 杨治宜 张辉
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published The Netherlands BRILL 01.01.2015
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1673-7318
1673-7423
DOI10.3868/s010-004-015-0028-9

Cover

More Information
Summary:For too long the specter of Darwinism has haunted the narrative of Chinese literary history. It is told as a story of "evolution," a triumphant confluence of folk and vernacular literature, along a chain of genre development from dynasty to dynasty. The 1917 New Culture Movement is seen as the teleological end of this evolution. Accordingly, vernacular literature has been taken to represent literary modernity, hence enjoying a monopoly in academic research. Classical-style poetry that continued to be written in the twentieth-century has been almost entirely neglected. Generations of writers produced verse in various classical-styles and genres over the last century. Many poets, known for their vernacular verses, turned to traditional forms and expressions, especially in moments of hardship or distress, to reinvent a voice or to find an emotional outlet. Little of their endeavor, however, has been honored by literary historiography. It is true that the winner writes history. But it is a scholar's obligation to address selective cultural amnesia.
Bibliography:For too long the specter of Darwinism has haunted the narrative of Chinese literary history. It is told as a story of "evolution," a triumphant confluence of folk and vernacular literature, along a chain of genre development from dynasty to dynasty. The 1917 New Culture Movement is seen as the teleological end of this evolution. Accordingly, vernacular literature has been taken to represent literary modernity, hence enjoying a monopoly in academic research. Classical-style poetry that continued to be written in the twentieth-century has been almost entirely neglected. Generations of writers produced verse in various classical-styles and genres over the last century. Many poets, known for their vernacular verses, turned to traditional forms and expressions, especially in moments of hardship or distress, to reinvent a voice or to find an emotional outlet. Little of their endeavor, however, has been honored by literary historiography. It is true that the winner writes history. But it is a scholar's obligation to address selective cultural amnesia.
11-5745/I
ISSN:1673-7318
1673-7423
DOI:10.3868/s010-004-015-0028-9