Foreword to the Special Issue on A Reader of Taiwan Literary History Part I
Terence Russell
T his issue, the fifty-fourth in the series, marks a new stage in the history of our journal. It is the first issue to be entirely produced since the untimely passing Professor Kuo-ch’ing Tu in February in early 2025. Professor Tu was the founder and guiding spirit of this journal for almost thirty years. His drive, inspiration and support are, of course, deeply missed, to the point that it was very difficult to imagine the continued existence of Taiwan Literature: English Translation Series (TLETS) in his absence. However, having worked closely with Prof. Tu for many years, I know it was his strong wish that we continue the important work of introducing Taiwan literature to the English reading public that he began in 1996. We also believe that, although there are other journals that publish translations of Taiwan literature on a regular basis, the core values that Prof. Tu sought to convey in every volume of TLETS set it apart and make it uniquely valuable as a translation resource. So it is that we hope this issue will be a new beginning in the life of a journal that represents values that we share with Prof. Tu.
While Issue Fifty-four has been entirely produced since Prof. Tu’s passing, it still bears his imprint in more than one way. Perhaps most importantly, Prof. Tu worked tirelessly to establish an independent funding source for the journal and other related projects. As a result, we have the US-Taiwan Literature Foundation, now represented by Lucian Tu, which will provide the basic funding for many issues of the journal to come. We also are very fortunate to be able to rely upon a strong relationship with National Taiwan University Press, a relationship that Prof. Tu cultivated so as to ensure that future issues of TLETS are produced to the highest standards both in print and online. In this way, not only has Prof. Tu inspired us to continue the work of the journal, he provided the tangible basis upon which that work can be done.
The content of this issue, and the next, were also determined by Prof. Tu prior to his passing. Always anxious to ensure that the journal could move forward smoothly and without interruption, he had for some time been in communication with Professor Shu-ling Horng of National Taiwan University, with the idea of translating Prof. Horng’s A Reader of Taiwan Literary History (Taiwan wenxueshi duben) for the journal. Prof. Horng’s Reader is a collection of essays, written by herself and by a number of younger scholars, that provides a contemporary supplement of the various earlier histories of Taiwan literature. Since TLETS published a translation of one of those histories, Yeh Shih-t’ao’s pioneering An Outline History of Taiwan Literature, as Issue Fifty-one, a rendering of Prof. Horng’s Reader seemed a natural choice. To our great relief, despite no longer being able to rely upon Prof. Tu to ensure the successful production of this project, Prof. Horng consented to allow us to proceed with the work of translation and editing. This is a demonstration of faith that we greatly appreciate.
Due to the length of the Reader and the page limits of TLETS, our translation will have to be divided into two separate issues, the first presenting Prof. Horng’s Introduction and the first seven chapters. The second volume will include Chapters Nine through Sixteen. Since the chapters are arranged according to chronology and genre, this first installment deals will literary expression in Taiwan from the late Ming period, and includes a number of chapters on poetry from earliest recorded history to the modern era. The issue to follow will be more concerned with postwar and contemporary literature, dealt with according to genre. In all, Prof. Horng’s Reader, once translated into English, should provide students of Taiwan’s literary development with a useful guide to the full sweep of written expression on the island, offering much discussion and detailed information not found in other sources.
In her Introduction, Prof. Horng signals her intention that the Reader should be seen in the context of earlier attempts to create an overall framework of Taiwan’s literary history. To this end, she provides a brief outline of the historiography of Taiwan’s literature, beginning with the work of Huang Deshi from the 1940s while Taiwan was still under Japanese rule. Huang is important because he referenced European literary historians, particularly French scholar Hippolyte Adolphe Taine, in advancing the principle that literature cannot be disassociated with the human, historical and natural environment in which it is produced. This fundamental view was further expanded by later literary historians, like Chen Shao-ting, Yeh Shih-t’ao and Peng Jui-chin. However, whereas Huang was arguing against the Japanese imperial view of Taiwan as a colonial outpost, only significant as a peripheral adjunct to the Japanese “mainland,” Yeh and Peng argued against the view that Taiwan as marginal to the great Chinese literary tradition. Both Yeh and Peng took pains to demonstrate that, on the contrary, the literature of Taiwan has a history and an ésprit independent of China.
The narrative that Taiwan was but a small and insignificant part of Greater China was promoted strongly by the Chinese Nationalist government that took over the administration of Taiwan after World War II. Students in school were taught that the history of China was their history, and the literature of China was their literature, something that they should take great pride in. The study of the history, literature and unique cultural experience of Taiwan was not encouraged or even allowed except as “provincial” history, literature, culture, etc.
This all changed dramatically with the end of martial law in 1987, which was accompanied by gradual movement toward fully democratic government. Since the 1990s the study of Taiwan as an entity separate from China has become increasingly mainstream and institutionalized. Horng Shu-ling notes this profound realignment as it pertains to literature, indicating that it is fundamental to her approach to constructing her Reader.
Horng Shu-ling is one of the leading authorities on modern poetry in Taiwan. It is thus not surprising that she would choose to author several of the chapters in the Reader which deal with poetry. In this issue, Chapter Six on postwar modernist poetry, Chapter Seven dealing with the rise and fall of poetry societies and increased plurality, and Chapter Eight devoted to women poets in Taiwan, were all written by Prof. Horng. These essays provide a trove of information and insight.
Chapter Six looks back on the tension that arose in the postwar era as recent emigré poets from China found themselves in an environment strongly shaped by Japanese literary trends and traditions, which in turn had been influenced heavily by developments in European literature. Chapter Seven first takes a look at the persistent existence of poetry societies in Taiwan and their contributions to the overall contour of poetic development. The first poetry society in Taiwan was formed in 1685 by Shen Guangwen. Throughout the pre-modern era, such organizations facilitated the sharing of literary ideas and works among poets and other literati. Throughout the Japanese period and postwar era, different poetry societies also came to represent various political and aesthetic ideologies and were instrumental in supporting cultural and social movements. As Taiwan developed into a free and open society with a strong national identity and a commitment of plurality, the overtly political timbre of poetry societies faded somewhat, to be superseded by greater diversity of literary practice and aesthetics. Various “-isms” from Modernism, to Surealism, and Post-moderism were, and still are, debated within the context of poetry societies and academic fora.
One of the most important aspects of Taiwan’s embrace of greater cultural diversity and inclusion has been an increased recognition of the important work of women authors. In Chapter Eight of the Reader, Horng Shu-ling turns her attention to the many excellent female poets who have contributed Taiwan’s poetry scene, especially in the postwar and post-martial law eras. Horng divides these poets into four distinct generations according to their time of birth, but sometimes subdivided according to their place of birth and educational background. The first generation, born between 1919 and 1938, include poets who were born and educated in Taiwan under Japanese rule, as well as those who were born in China and migrated to Taiwan after the war. Generation Two, born between 1939 and 1950, also includes those born in Taiwan, and those who emigrated from China. However, to a much greater extent, these poets and their creative art were influenced by the more internationalized intellectual realm of Taiwan in the immediate postwar era. As a consequence, their poetry bears the imprint of Western poetic trends and theories. Similar observations can be made about the third generation of female poets identified by Prof. Horng, those born between 1951 and 1970. These “boomer” poets generally better educated and more ideologically sophisticated than earlier generations. Their work also engages with a broader range of material, and is less inclined to explore traditionally feminine concerns such as emotional life and family. Finally, the fourth generation of female poets, born after 1971, demonstrate an even greater range of styles and thematic interests. They have moved away from imagery and symbolism traditionally associated with women poets in favor of personal and unique representations of life.
Chapter Two, on early classical literature in Taiwan has been ably compiled by Yi-wen Chuang, a graduate of National Taiwan University and expert on classical literature in Taiwan, and literature during the period of Japanese rule. Dr. Chuang provides an excellent overview of how Taiwan, as a geographical and cultural entity, entered the classical Chinese imaginary beginning in the seventeenth century, especially as the island was drawn into the final struggles of Ming dynasty loyalists like Zheng Chenggong (Koxinga) to resist the Manchu Qing takeover of the Chinese homeland. We observe how Taiwan was viewed as a realm of barbarians, some of whom had adopted a more sedentary agrarian life under Dutch colonial rule, but many of whom remained hostile to Chinese occupation of their lands. Nonetheless, many early Chinese scholars and officials took a strong interest in the lives of these “barbarian” Indigenous peoples, compiling detailed ethnographies of their customs. Like earlier European explorers, classical literati were also impressed with the sheer beauty of Taiwan and depictions of the island’s scenery became a major theme in their classical verse.
Dr. Chuang is also the author of Chapter Three, which looks at literature in classical Chinese (wenyanwen) during the Japanese colonial era and into the postwar period. Here we observe that those Chinese scholars who remained, or returned to, Taiwan after the Japanese takeover found much in common with their Japanese counterparts, however much they may have resented the latter’s dominance of the island. During the Meiji and Taishō reign periods in Japan (1868-1912/1912-1926) most educated Japanese were taught to read and compose classical Chinese, albeit in the uniquely Japanese manner known as Kambun kundoku which allowed for an understanding of classical Chinese through Japanese pronunciation and grammar. In any case, this familiarity with classical Chinese, gave the Japanese colonial rulers a natural entré into local Taiwanese literati circles, something that they exploited as a means to gain the trust and support of local leadership on the island. The Japanese participated in and encouraged local literary activities including poetry societies. The Governor-General sponsored important literary gatherings involving both Taiwanese and Japanese writers. Such interaction greatly assisted in facilitating smooth relations between the colonial overlords and educated community leaders in Taiwan during the early period of Japanese rule.
In Chapter Four, written by Yun-yuan Chen, the profound changes that took place in Taiwan’s literature during the early Japanese colonial era are the main topic of discussion. During this time, not only were new ideas introduced from other parts of the world, the very medium of written expression was the subject of heated debate. Classical Chinese, which had formed the basis of traditional literate culture in China for over two thousand years, was attacked as antiquated, feudal, and unsuitable for modern literary discourse. In its place, vernacular Chinese, baihua, based on modern Mandarin usage and grammar, was advocated by those intent on modernizing China from the ground up.
In China, the May Fourth Movement of 1919 signaled a period of intense interrogation of classical traditions in literature. The transition to the use of baihuawen, famously advocated by Hu Shi in an article published in 1917, became a major tenet of the mostly leftist writers who came to prominence in the wake of May Fourth. Those writers and intellectuals struggled against the oppressive social and political systems of imperial China. By contrast, Taiwan was governed by Japan, which had already been very successful in reforming its society and economy. Thus though the Taiwanese New Literature Movement of the 1920s and 1930s took much inspiration from the May Fourth Movement, it necessarily took on different meaning.
Dr. Chen describes how it was young intellectuals, like Zhang Wojun and Lai He who helped introduce the principles of the May Fourth Movement to Taiwan, but who also recognized that Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule had to deal with a number of issues unique to the island. The Taiwanese New Literature Movement advocated the use of vernacular language in literature and had a distinctly leftist orientation, it also had strongly anti-colonial and nativist elements also present in Chinese new literature, but which, because of Taiwan’s historical experience, were nuanced differently.
As is almost always the case throughout world history, the New Literature Movement in Taiwan arose as part of a period of general social and cultural change. The Japanese colonial administration was first and foremost intent on developing the infrastructure in Taiwan which would facilitate the exploitation of the island’s natural resources. However, as will other colonial powers, the Japanese realized that they would have to rely upon an educated native population in order to carry out their colonial project. This meant that not only did Taiwanese receive modern Japanese educations in the public school system on the island itself, many Taiwanese also traveled to Japan to enroll in universities and technical colleges. While in Japan, these young Taiwanese often found inspiration in the lively political atmosphere there, absorbing leftist and nationalist ideology. In response, many students organized groups devoted to resisting Japanese colonialism and strengthening Taiwanese national consciousness.
One of the things that separates the history of Taiwan literature that of China is that during the Japanese period, many young Taiwanese, having received all of their formal education in Japanese language, chose to write in that “language of the oppressor.” This is a choice made by many colonized people around the world who find their native cultural traditions overwhelmed by colonial power. Making use of the oppressor’s language did not, however, mean rejecting native identity and succumbing to colonial domination. Some of the most radical and anti-colonial literature was written in Japanese. The journal has presented many examples of this writing in earlier volumes.
Not all literature from this era was inspired by anticolonialism and nationalism. There were significant numbers of Taiwanese authors who felt an admiration for Japanese cultural and society. Many actively participated in literary circles in Japan, or in Taiwan, with hopes of receiving acceptance by their colonial rulers. Still others were able to access literary and intellectual ideas from outside of Japan. The Japanese were dedicated to the complete modernization of their nation and this usually meant learning from Western nations. Western literature, history and philosophy works were widely available in Japanese translation, and young Taiwanese were open to the innovative and alternative views that they presented. Modernist theories of literature, including Futurism, Cubism, Dadaism and Surrealism thus found their way into Taiwanese writing during this period.
In Chapter Five, Yun-yuan Chen continues with the fate of the New Literature Movement during the 1930s and 1940s. This was a time heavily colored by war in East Asia, and literature, as well as those who wrote it could not escape war’s shadow. In order to make the greatest use of the human, as well as natural resources of Taiwan, the Japanese administration applied ever greater pressure on the people of Taiwan to assimilate more fully into Japanese society, as well as to identify with Japanese imperial objectives. The programmatic manifestation of this assimilative pressure was the Kōminka or “Imperial subjects” movement. Under this regime, Taiwanese were pushed to give up their native culture and language and become fully Japanese subjects loyal to the emperor.
As might be expected, reaction to the Kōminka Movement in Taiwan was mixed, especially among the élite and well-educated. Some Taiwanese recognized Japanese culture as more advanced than their native Chinese traditions and were happy to identify with it. Others could not accept the Japanese imperialist project and looked for ways in which to resist it. Some of that resistance stemmed from nationalistic concerns, but there was also a strong rejection of the Japanese administration’s promotion of literature with didactic, or propagandistic content in support of the war effort. Authors like Lü Heruo wrote extensively against the use of such didactic literature, but the Japanese authorities were quick to suppress the expression of such sentiments.
The most heated controversy during the war period was over so-called “shit-realism.” This was directly related to the dilemma that Taiwanese writers found themselves in under the strict control of Japanese wartime administration. The Japanese authorities hoped that literature in Taiwan, as elsewhere in their colonial holdings, would serve to bolster support for the war effort and rally the general citizenry to the cause of uniting all of East Asia under Japanese leadership. As mentioned above, some writers did their best to perform their propagandistic duties and produced stilted works demonstrating the virtues of patriotism and sacrifice for the Japanese cause. Other writers, however, did not wish to bow to government pressure and instead produced works about everyday life in the countryside, or family histories in the name of realism and “revitalizing local culture.” Writers and critics faithful to Japan rejected this work as unhelpful to the war effort and labeled it “shit-realism.” As the war progressed, those remaining writers who sought to portray life in Taiwan in more realistic terms were defeated and any remaining creative space for independent literature disappeared.
Issue 54 is a new beginning for Taiwan Literature: English Translation Series. In Professor Tu’s absence we must forge our own way forward and establish new standards to guide our work. At the same time, we are committed to maintaining Prof. Tu’s fundamental editorial principles in this and all future issues. We strongly believe in the autonomy and intrinsic value of Taiwan literature, and we will take up the mission of introducing that literature to world audiences. The future of Taiwan literature, like the future of Taiwan itself, is bright. It is our intention to demonstrate that brilliance to the world.
I am extremely grateful for the support of so many people who have contributed to the successful production of this volume. First and foremost, I want to thank Professor Shu-ling Horng for placing her trust in me and the rest of the journal’s production team. Prof. Horng had a very close scholarly and personal relationship with Prof. Tu, and I know that must have been difficult for her to imagine the translation and publication of her Reader in his absence. We hope that the final product will be worthy of her trust.
For the past ten years, we have relied upon the support and expertise of National Taiwan University Press in the publication of TLETS. The team at NTU Press assists with formatting, proofreading, and cover design. We could never hope for a final product of such high quality without their help. Our gratitude also goes to our translators who continue to provide literary renderings of the highest fidelity and readability. Because of the highly scholastic nature of the present issue, our translators have especially been challenged to exercise a high degree of scholarly knowledge in accurately reflecting the content of the various topics covered in the Reader. In the initial editorial process, our English copy-editor Fred Edwards continues to lend his experience, wisdom and patience to the polishing of the translated texts. Finally, since the passing of Prof. Tu, Lucian Tu, Prof. Tu’s son, has been a constant source of guidance and enthusiastic support for the work of the journal. Lucian has taken over the administration of the US-Taiwan Literature Foundation and, despite his busy work schedule, has given generously of his time and knowledge as we consider the future direction of the TLETS. To Lucian, and to all those who have expressed their strong support for this journal’s important work, I express my deepest gratitude.
Terence Russell
T his issue, the fifty-fourth in the series, marks a new stage in the history of our journal. It is the first issue to be entirely produced since the untimely passing Professor Kuo-ch’ing Tu in February in early 2025. Professor Tu was the founder and guiding spirit of this journal for almost thirty years. His drive, inspiration and support are, of course, deeply missed, to the point that it was very difficult to imagine the continued existence of Taiwan Literature: English Translation Series (TLETS) in his absence. However, having worked closely with Prof. Tu for many years, I know it was his strong wish that we continue the important work of introducing Taiwan literature to the English reading public that he began in 1996. We also believe that, although there are other journals that publish translations of Taiwan literature on a regular basis, the core values that Prof. Tu sought to convey in every volume of TLETS set it apart and make it uniquely valuable as a translation resource. So it is that we hope this issue will be a new beginning in the life of a journal that represents values that we share with Prof. Tu.
While Issue Fifty-four has been entirely produced since Prof. Tu’s passing, it still bears his imprint in more than one way. Perhaps most importantly, Prof. Tu worked tirelessly to establish an independent funding source for the journal and other related projects. As a result, we have the US-Taiwan Literature Foundation, now represented by Lucian Tu, which will provide the basic funding for many issues of the journal to come. We also are very fortunate to be able to rely upon a strong relationship with National Taiwan University Press, a relationship that Prof. Tu cultivated so as to ensure that future issues of TLETS are produced to the highest standards both in print and online. In this way, not only has Prof. Tu inspired us to continue the work of the journal, he provided the tangible basis upon which that work can be done.
The content of this issue, and the next, were also determined by Prof. Tu prior to his passing. Always anxious to ensure that the journal could move forward smoothly and without interruption, he had for some time been in communication with Professor Shu-ling Horng of National Taiwan University, with the idea of translating Prof. Horng’s A Reader of Taiwan Literary History (Taiwan wenxueshi duben) for the journal. Prof. Horng’s Reader is a collection of essays, written by herself and by a number of younger scholars, that provides a contemporary supplement of the various earlier histories of Taiwan literature. Since TLETS published a translation of one of those histories, Yeh Shih-t’ao’s pioneering An Outline History of Taiwan Literature, as Issue Fifty-one, a rendering of Prof. Horng’s Reader seemed a natural choice. To our great relief, despite no longer being able to rely upon Prof. Tu to ensure the successful production of this project, Prof. Horng consented to allow us to proceed with the work of translation and editing. This is a demonstration of faith that we greatly appreciate.
Due to the length of the Reader and the page limits of TLETS, our translation will have to be divided into two separate issues, the first presenting Prof. Horng’s Introduction and the first seven chapters. The second volume will include Chapters Nine through Sixteen. Since the chapters are arranged according to chronology and genre, this first installment deals will literary expression in Taiwan from the late Ming period, and includes a number of chapters on poetry from earliest recorded history to the modern era. The issue to follow will be more concerned with postwar and contemporary literature, dealt with according to genre. In all, Prof. Horng’s Reader, once translated into English, should provide students of Taiwan’s literary development with a useful guide to the full sweep of written expression on the island, offering much discussion and detailed information not found in other sources.
In her Introduction, Prof. Horng signals her intention that the Reader should be seen in the context of earlier attempts to create an overall framework of Taiwan’s literary history. To this end, she provides a brief outline of the historiography of Taiwan’s literature, beginning with the work of Huang Deshi from the 1940s while Taiwan was still under Japanese rule. Huang is important because he referenced European literary historians, particularly French scholar Hippolyte Adolphe Taine, in advancing the principle that literature cannot be disassociated with the human, historical and natural environment in which it is produced. This fundamental view was further expanded by later literary historians, like Chen Shao-ting, Yeh Shih-t’ao and Peng Jui-chin. However, whereas Huang was arguing against the Japanese imperial view of Taiwan as a colonial outpost, only significant as a peripheral adjunct to the Japanese “mainland,” Yeh and Peng argued against the view that Taiwan as marginal to the great Chinese literary tradition. Both Yeh and Peng took pains to demonstrate that, on the contrary, the literature of Taiwan has a history and an ésprit independent of China.
The narrative that Taiwan was but a small and insignificant part of Greater China was promoted strongly by the Chinese Nationalist government that took over the administration of Taiwan after World War II. Students in school were taught that the history of China was their history, and the literature of China was their literature, something that they should take great pride in. The study of the history, literature and unique cultural experience of Taiwan was not encouraged or even allowed except as “provincial” history, literature, culture, etc.
This all changed dramatically with the end of martial law in 1987, which was accompanied by gradual movement toward fully democratic government. Since the 1990s the study of Taiwan as an entity separate from China has become increasingly mainstream and institutionalized. Horng Shu-ling notes this profound realignment as it pertains to literature, indicating that it is fundamental to her approach to constructing her Reader.
Horng Shu-ling is one of the leading authorities on modern poetry in Taiwan. It is thus not surprising that she would choose to author several of the chapters in the Reader which deal with poetry. In this issue, Chapter Six on postwar modernist poetry, Chapter Seven dealing with the rise and fall of poetry societies and increased plurality, and Chapter Eight devoted to women poets in Taiwan, were all written by Prof. Horng. These essays provide a trove of information and insight.
Chapter Six looks back on the tension that arose in the postwar era as recent emigré poets from China found themselves in an environment strongly shaped by Japanese literary trends and traditions, which in turn had been influenced heavily by developments in European literature. Chapter Seven first takes a look at the persistent existence of poetry societies in Taiwan and their contributions to the overall contour of poetic development. The first poetry society in Taiwan was formed in 1685 by Shen Guangwen. Throughout the pre-modern era, such organizations facilitated the sharing of literary ideas and works among poets and other literati. Throughout the Japanese period and postwar era, different poetry societies also came to represent various political and aesthetic ideologies and were instrumental in supporting cultural and social movements. As Taiwan developed into a free and open society with a strong national identity and a commitment of plurality, the overtly political timbre of poetry societies faded somewhat, to be superseded by greater diversity of literary practice and aesthetics. Various “-isms” from Modernism, to Surealism, and Post-moderism were, and still are, debated within the context of poetry societies and academic fora.
One of the most important aspects of Taiwan’s embrace of greater cultural diversity and inclusion has been an increased recognition of the important work of women authors. In Chapter Eight of the Reader, Horng Shu-ling turns her attention to the many excellent female poets who have contributed Taiwan’s poetry scene, especially in the postwar and post-martial law eras. Horng divides these poets into four distinct generations according to their time of birth, but sometimes subdivided according to their place of birth and educational background. The first generation, born between 1919 and 1938, include poets who were born and educated in Taiwan under Japanese rule, as well as those who were born in China and migrated to Taiwan after the war. Generation Two, born between 1939 and 1950, also includes those born in Taiwan, and those who emigrated from China. However, to a much greater extent, these poets and their creative art were influenced by the more internationalized intellectual realm of Taiwan in the immediate postwar era. As a consequence, their poetry bears the imprint of Western poetic trends and theories. Similar observations can be made about the third generation of female poets identified by Prof. Horng, those born between 1951 and 1970. These “boomer” poets generally better educated and more ideologically sophisticated than earlier generations. Their work also engages with a broader range of material, and is less inclined to explore traditionally feminine concerns such as emotional life and family. Finally, the fourth generation of female poets, born after 1971, demonstrate an even greater range of styles and thematic interests. They have moved away from imagery and symbolism traditionally associated with women poets in favor of personal and unique representations of life.
Chapter Two, on early classical literature in Taiwan has been ably compiled by Yi-wen Chuang, a graduate of National Taiwan University and expert on classical literature in Taiwan, and literature during the period of Japanese rule. Dr. Chuang provides an excellent overview of how Taiwan, as a geographical and cultural entity, entered the classical Chinese imaginary beginning in the seventeenth century, especially as the island was drawn into the final struggles of Ming dynasty loyalists like Zheng Chenggong (Koxinga) to resist the Manchu Qing takeover of the Chinese homeland. We observe how Taiwan was viewed as a realm of barbarians, some of whom had adopted a more sedentary agrarian life under Dutch colonial rule, but many of whom remained hostile to Chinese occupation of their lands. Nonetheless, many early Chinese scholars and officials took a strong interest in the lives of these “barbarian” Indigenous peoples, compiling detailed ethnographies of their customs. Like earlier European explorers, classical literati were also impressed with the sheer beauty of Taiwan and depictions of the island’s scenery became a major theme in their classical verse.
Dr. Chuang is also the author of Chapter Three, which looks at literature in classical Chinese (wenyanwen) during the Japanese colonial era and into the postwar period. Here we observe that those Chinese scholars who remained, or returned to, Taiwan after the Japanese takeover found much in common with their Japanese counterparts, however much they may have resented the latter’s dominance of the island. During the Meiji and Taishō reign periods in Japan (1868-1912/1912-1926) most educated Japanese were taught to read and compose classical Chinese, albeit in the uniquely Japanese manner known as Kambun kundoku which allowed for an understanding of classical Chinese through Japanese pronunciation and grammar. In any case, this familiarity with classical Chinese, gave the Japanese colonial rulers a natural entré into local Taiwanese literati circles, something that they exploited as a means to gain the trust and support of local leadership on the island. The Japanese participated in and encouraged local literary activities including poetry societies. The Governor-General sponsored important literary gatherings involving both Taiwanese and Japanese writers. Such interaction greatly assisted in facilitating smooth relations between the colonial overlords and educated community leaders in Taiwan during the early period of Japanese rule.
In Chapter Four, written by Yun-yuan Chen, the profound changes that took place in Taiwan’s literature during the early Japanese colonial era are the main topic of discussion. During this time, not only were new ideas introduced from other parts of the world, the very medium of written expression was the subject of heated debate. Classical Chinese, which had formed the basis of traditional literate culture in China for over two thousand years, was attacked as antiquated, feudal, and unsuitable for modern literary discourse. In its place, vernacular Chinese, baihua, based on modern Mandarin usage and grammar, was advocated by those intent on modernizing China from the ground up.
In China, the May Fourth Movement of 1919 signaled a period of intense interrogation of classical traditions in literature. The transition to the use of baihuawen, famously advocated by Hu Shi in an article published in 1917, became a major tenet of the mostly leftist writers who came to prominence in the wake of May Fourth. Those writers and intellectuals struggled against the oppressive social and political systems of imperial China. By contrast, Taiwan was governed by Japan, which had already been very successful in reforming its society and economy. Thus though the Taiwanese New Literature Movement of the 1920s and 1930s took much inspiration from the May Fourth Movement, it necessarily took on different meaning.
Dr. Chen describes how it was young intellectuals, like Zhang Wojun and Lai He who helped introduce the principles of the May Fourth Movement to Taiwan, but who also recognized that Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule had to deal with a number of issues unique to the island. The Taiwanese New Literature Movement advocated the use of vernacular language in literature and had a distinctly leftist orientation, it also had strongly anti-colonial and nativist elements also present in Chinese new literature, but which, because of Taiwan’s historical experience, were nuanced differently.
As is almost always the case throughout world history, the New Literature Movement in Taiwan arose as part of a period of general social and cultural change. The Japanese colonial administration was first and foremost intent on developing the infrastructure in Taiwan which would facilitate the exploitation of the island’s natural resources. However, as will other colonial powers, the Japanese realized that they would have to rely upon an educated native population in order to carry out their colonial project. This meant that not only did Taiwanese receive modern Japanese educations in the public school system on the island itself, many Taiwanese also traveled to Japan to enroll in universities and technical colleges. While in Japan, these young Taiwanese often found inspiration in the lively political atmosphere there, absorbing leftist and nationalist ideology. In response, many students organized groups devoted to resisting Japanese colonialism and strengthening Taiwanese national consciousness.
One of the things that separates the history of Taiwan literature that of China is that during the Japanese period, many young Taiwanese, having received all of their formal education in Japanese language, chose to write in that “language of the oppressor.” This is a choice made by many colonized people around the world who find their native cultural traditions overwhelmed by colonial power. Making use of the oppressor’s language did not, however, mean rejecting native identity and succumbing to colonial domination. Some of the most radical and anti-colonial literature was written in Japanese. The journal has presented many examples of this writing in earlier volumes.
Not all literature from this era was inspired by anticolonialism and nationalism. There were significant numbers of Taiwanese authors who felt an admiration for Japanese cultural and society. Many actively participated in literary circles in Japan, or in Taiwan, with hopes of receiving acceptance by their colonial rulers. Still others were able to access literary and intellectual ideas from outside of Japan. The Japanese were dedicated to the complete modernization of their nation and this usually meant learning from Western nations. Western literature, history and philosophy works were widely available in Japanese translation, and young Taiwanese were open to the innovative and alternative views that they presented. Modernist theories of literature, including Futurism, Cubism, Dadaism and Surrealism thus found their way into Taiwanese writing during this period.
In Chapter Five, Yun-yuan Chen continues with the fate of the New Literature Movement during the 1930s and 1940s. This was a time heavily colored by war in East Asia, and literature, as well as those who wrote it could not escape war’s shadow. In order to make the greatest use of the human, as well as natural resources of Taiwan, the Japanese administration applied ever greater pressure on the people of Taiwan to assimilate more fully into Japanese society, as well as to identify with Japanese imperial objectives. The programmatic manifestation of this assimilative pressure was the Kōminka or “Imperial subjects” movement. Under this regime, Taiwanese were pushed to give up their native culture and language and become fully Japanese subjects loyal to the emperor.
As might be expected, reaction to the Kōminka Movement in Taiwan was mixed, especially among the élite and well-educated. Some Taiwanese recognized Japanese culture as more advanced than their native Chinese traditions and were happy to identify with it. Others could not accept the Japanese imperialist project and looked for ways in which to resist it. Some of that resistance stemmed from nationalistic concerns, but there was also a strong rejection of the Japanese administration’s promotion of literature with didactic, or propagandistic content in support of the war effort. Authors like Lü Heruo wrote extensively against the use of such didactic literature, but the Japanese authorities were quick to suppress the expression of such sentiments.
The most heated controversy during the war period was over so-called “shit-realism.” This was directly related to the dilemma that Taiwanese writers found themselves in under the strict control of Japanese wartime administration. The Japanese authorities hoped that literature in Taiwan, as elsewhere in their colonial holdings, would serve to bolster support for the war effort and rally the general citizenry to the cause of uniting all of East Asia under Japanese leadership. As mentioned above, some writers did their best to perform their propagandistic duties and produced stilted works demonstrating the virtues of patriotism and sacrifice for the Japanese cause. Other writers, however, did not wish to bow to government pressure and instead produced works about everyday life in the countryside, or family histories in the name of realism and “revitalizing local culture.” Writers and critics faithful to Japan rejected this work as unhelpful to the war effort and labeled it “shit-realism.” As the war progressed, those remaining writers who sought to portray life in Taiwan in more realistic terms were defeated and any remaining creative space for independent literature disappeared.
Issue 54 is a new beginning for Taiwan Literature: English Translation Series. In Professor Tu’s absence we must forge our own way forward and establish new standards to guide our work. At the same time, we are committed to maintaining Prof. Tu’s fundamental editorial principles in this and all future issues. We strongly believe in the autonomy and intrinsic value of Taiwan literature, and we will take up the mission of introducing that literature to world audiences. The future of Taiwan literature, like the future of Taiwan itself, is bright. It is our intention to demonstrate that brilliance to the world.
I am extremely grateful for the support of so many people who have contributed to the successful production of this volume. First and foremost, I want to thank Professor Shu-ling Horng for placing her trust in me and the rest of the journal’s production team. Prof. Horng had a very close scholarly and personal relationship with Prof. Tu, and I know that must have been difficult for her to imagine the translation and publication of her Reader in his absence. We hope that the final product will be worthy of her trust.
For the past ten years, we have relied upon the support and expertise of National Taiwan University Press in the publication of TLETS. The team at NTU Press assists with formatting, proofreading, and cover design. We could never hope for a final product of such high quality without their help. Our gratitude also goes to our translators who continue to provide literary renderings of the highest fidelity and readability. Because of the highly scholastic nature of the present issue, our translators have especially been challenged to exercise a high degree of scholarly knowledge in accurately reflecting the content of the various topics covered in the Reader. In the initial editorial process, our English copy-editor Fred Edwards continues to lend his experience, wisdom and patience to the polishing of the translated texts. Finally, since the passing of Prof. Tu, Lucian Tu, Prof. Tu’s son, has been a constant source of guidance and enthusiastic support for the work of the journal. Lucian has taken over the administration of the US-Taiwan Literature Foundation and, despite his busy work schedule, has given generously of his time and knowledge as we consider the future direction of the TLETS. To Lucian, and to all those who have expressed their strong support for this journal’s important work, I express my deepest gratitude.
