{"id":1484,"date":"2012-12-14T10:30:47","date_gmt":"2012-12-14T02:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/xichuanpoetry.com\/?p=1484"},"modified":"2012-12-14T22:31:26","modified_gmt":"2012-12-14T14:31:26","slug":"mo-yan-liu-xiaobo-another-nobel-roundup","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xichuanpoetry.com\/?p=1484","title":{"rendered":"Mo Yan & Liu Xiaobo: Another Nobel Roundup"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Mo Yan \u83ab\u8a00 has given his Nobel acceptance speech<\/a>, but that doesn’t mean the debates about whether he deserved the award have stopped–or that older pieces haven’t been resurfacing.<\/p>\n

A good deal of the debate focuses on the contrast between Mo Yan and Liu Xiaobo<\/a> \u5218\u6653\u6ce2, the imprisoned critic who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010. Larry Siems and Jeffrey Yang (my editor at New Directions<\/a>) make the case in “China’s Nobels<\/a>” that while Liu is “is serving an 11-year sentence for ‘inciting subversion of state power’ in his writings” (while his wife is under house arrest<\/a>), Mo Yan “has done little to jeopardize his status as one of the country\u2019s most honored writers.” Yang is the translator of Liu’s poems assembled in June Fourth Elegies<\/a> <\/em>\u5ff5\u5ff5\u516d\u56db, which has just been noted as one of Poets.org’s Notable Books <\/a>of 2012. Yang and Siems do note that despite the difference between the two Nobels, their stories do converge: “Mo Yan, who had previously pleaded ignorance of his countryman\u2019s case, told reporters that he hoped that Mr. Liu ‘can achieve his freedom as soon as possible’ and that he should be free to research his ‘politics and social system.'” Another editor of a recent Liu Xiaobo publication in English, however, Perry Link, editor of No Enemies, No Hatred: Selected Essays and Poems <\/a><\/em>of Liu Xiaobo, is less impressed: in “Does This Writer Deserve the Nobel Prize?<\/a>” Link speculates, “Was Mo Yan\u2019s ‘in good health’ phrase something that Chinese authorities had supplied to him, perhaps to prepare the way in international opinion for Liu Xiaobo\u2019s ‘seeking medical treatment abroad’?”<\/p>\n

In his Nobel speech, Mo Yan says, “I would like you to find the patience to read my books” \u6211\u5e0c\u671b\u4f60\u4eec\u80fd\u8010\u5fc3\u5730\u8bfb\u4e00\u4e0b\u6211\u7684\u4e66. Many commentators have read the speech, such as Chad Post at Three Percent<\/a>, or Mark McDonald, who notices “‘Garlands and Mud’ for New Nobel Laureate from China<\/a>,” or Adam Minter, whose “Mo Yan’s Nobel: Parable of a Patsy?<\/a>” looks at the controversy both outside of China and in, but they don’t seem to notice that one of the stories Mo Yan tells in his lecture about an empty chair–<\/p>\n

More than thirty years ago, when I was in the army, I was in my office reading one evening when an elderly officer opened the door and came in. He glanced down at the seat in front of me and muttered, \u201cHm, where is everyone?\u201d I stood up and said in a loud voice, \u201cAre you saying I\u2019m no one?\u201d The old fellow\u2019s ears turned red from embarrassment, and he walked out. For a long time after that I was proud about what I consider a gutsy performance. Years later, that pride turned to intense qualms of conscience.<\/p>\n

\u4e09\u5341\u591a\u5e74\u524d\uff0c\u6211\u8fd8\u5728\u90e8\u961f\u5de5\u4f5c\u3002\u6709\u4e00\u5929\u665a\u4e0a\uff0c\u6211\u5728\u529e\u516c\u5ba4\u770b\u4e66\uff0c\u6709\u4e00\u4f4d\u8001\u957f\u5b98\u63a8\u95e8\u8fdb\u6765\uff0c\u770b\u4e86\u4e00\u773c\u6211\u5bf9\u9762\u7684\u4f4d\u7f6e\uff0c\u81ea\u8a00\u81ea\u8bed\u9053\uff1a\u201c\u5662\uff0c\u6ca1\u6709\u4eba\uff1f\u201d\u6211\u968f\u5373\u7ad9\u8d77\u6765\uff0c\u9ad8\u58f0\u8bf4\uff1a\u201c\u96be\u9053\u6211\u4e0d\u662f\u4eba\u5417\uff1f\u201d\u90a3\u4f4d\u8001\u957f\u5b98\u88ab\u6211\u9876\u5f97\u9762\u7ea2\u8033\u8d64\uff0c\u5c34\u5c2c\u800c\u9000\u3002\u4e3a\u6b64\u4e8b\uff0c\u6211\u6d0b\u6d0b\u5f97\u610f\u4e86\u8bb8\u4e45\uff0c\u4ee5\u4e3a\u81ea\u5df1\u662f\u4e2a\u82f1\u52c7\u7684\u6597\u58eb\uff0c\u4f46\u4e8b\u8fc7\u591a\u5e74\u540e\uff0c\u6211\u5374\u4e3a\u6b64\u6df1\u611f\u5185\u759a\u3002<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

–seems to invoke the empty chair of Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel Peace prize two years ago.<\/p>\n

Nor do many commentators seem to have read his books very closely. Andrea Lingenfelter, who has, though, says in her review of his forthcoming novel Pow!<\/a><\/em> (translated, as always, by Howard Goldblatt) that it, “like the bulk of Mo Yan\u2019s other novels, is a social and political critique”; interestingly, when I first caught her review online I remember it being less patient with criticisms of Mo Yan’s politics. Perhaps she was convinced by Link’s article, or Mo Yan’s defense of censorship.<\/p>\n

As for his remarks on censorship, under the headline “Censorship is a must, says China’s Nobel winner<\/a>,” the Guardian <\/em>reports that he “defended censorship as something as necessary as airport security checks.” This, unsurprisingly, has gathered lots of commentary: Publishing Perspectives asks, “is it?<\/a>” and Canada’s Globe & Mail<\/em> says “that’s just wrong<\/a>.” Salman Rushdie <\/a>concludes Mo Yan is “a patsy of the r\u00e9gime,” while Pankaj Mishra <\/a>says Rushdie “should pause before condemning Mo Yan.” But look at what he said in Chinese<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\u6211\u53cd\u611f\u6240\u6709\u7684\u68c0\u67e5\u3002\u6211\u53bb\u5927\u4f7f\u9986\u529e\u7b7e\u8bc1\uff0c\u4ed6\u4eec\u4e5f\u8981\u68c0\u67e5\u3002\u6211\u5750\u98de\u673a\u51fa\u6d77\u5173\uff0c\u4ed6\u4eec\u4e5f\u8981\u68c0\u67e5\uff0c\u751a\u81f3\u8981\u89e3\u4e0b\u8170\u5e26\uff0c\u62d6\u978b\u68c0\u67e5\u3002\u4f46\u662f\u6211\u60f3\u8fd9\u4e9b\u68c0\u67e5\u662f\u5fc5\u8981\u7684\uff0c\u6211\u4ece\u6765\u6ca1\u6709\u8d5e \u7f8e\u8fc7\u65b0\u95fb\u68c0\u67e5\u8fd9\u79cd\u5236\u5ea6\uff0c\u4f46\u662f\u6211\u4e5f\u8ba4\u4e3a\u65b0\u95fb\u68c0\u67e5\u5728\u4e16\u754c\u4e0a\u6bcf\u4e2a\u56fd\u5bb6\u90fd\u662f\u5b58\u5728\u7684\u3002\u4f46\u662f\u8fd9\u79cd\u68c0\u67e5\u7684\u5c3a\u5ea6\uff0c\u68c0\u67e5\u7684\u65b9\u5f0f\u4e0d\u4e00\u6837\u3002\u5982\u679c\u6ca1\u6709\u65b0\u95fb\u68c0\u67e5\uff0c\u8fd9\u4e2a\u4eba\u5c31\u53ef\u4ee5\u5728\u62a5\u7eb8 \u4e0a\u6216\u8005\u662f\u7535\u89c6\u4e0a\u653b\u51fb\u5176\u4ed6\u4eba\uff0c\u8bfd\u8c24\u5176\u4ed6\u4eba\u3002\u8fd9\u4e2a\u6211\u60f3\u5728\u4efb\u4f55\u4e00\u4e2a\u56fd\u5bb6\u90fd\u662f\u4e00\u6837\u7684\u3002\u4f46\u662f\u6211\u5e0c\u671b\u6240\u6709\u65b0\u95fb\u68c0\u67e5\u5e94\u8be5\u6709\u6700\u9ad8\u51c6\u5219\uff1a\u53ea\u8981\u4e0d\u8fdd\u80cc\u4e8b\u5b9e\u771f\u76f8\u7684\u90fd\u4e0d\u5e94\u8be5\u68c0\u67e5\uff0c \u8fdd\u80cc\u4e86\u4e8b\u5b9e\u771f\u76f8\u9020\u8c23\u548c\u8bec\u8511\u7684\u90fd\u5e94\u8be5\u53d7\u5230\u68c0\u67e5\u3002<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The word he uses is jiancha<\/em>, usually translated as “check,” either as a verb or a noun, rather than “censorship,” which my dictionary tells me would be shencha<\/em> \u5ba1\u67e5. Jiancha<\/em> is, of course, related to security checks, which should help explain his comparison. And as I read it, he doesn’t say that checks should<\/em> exist but that they do <\/em>exist. I would give a rough translation of the passage as:<\/p>\n

I\u2019m disgusted with checks of all kinds. When I go to the embassy for a visa, I get checked. When I take an airplane and go through customs, I get checked, even have to take off my belt and shoes. But I figure these checks must be necessary, and while I\u2019ve never praised the system of checks on the news, I believe that checks on the news must exist in every country in the world. But measuring checks like this, the method of checking is different. If there were no checks on the news, somebody could go off in the newspapers or on TV and attack someone, or slander someone. I imagine it\u2019s the same in any country. But I would hope all checks on the news adhered to the highest principle: as long as it doesn\u2019t violate the truth it shouldn\u2019t be checked, but rumormongering and defamation that violates the truth should be put under check.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In a related point, Mo Yan was cited in a Time Magazine <\/a><\/em>feature two years ago:<\/p>\n

Mo Yan is adamant that he never worries about censorship when choosing what to write about. “There are certain restrictions on writing in every country,” he says, adding that the inability to attack some topics head on is actually an advantage. Such limitations make a writer “conform to the aesthetics of literature,” Mo Yan argues. “One of the biggest problems in literature is the lack of subtlety. A writer should bury his thoughts deep and convey them through the characters in his novel.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

<\/div>\n
You may disagree. You may find this na\u00efve. You may feel like security checks and censorship are not the same, and that the kinds of governmental controls on the news he imagines do not exist in your country and should not exist in his. You may feel that the restrictions on writing inherent to literature are of a different order from the restrictions on writing imposed by the government, and that writers can be subtle without having to worry about censorship. You may feel like the “highest principle” he wishes for is a pipe dream, that as long as the state has power to limit speech it will use that power, and the only high principle is the principle of freedom. I certainly think all those things. That is different, however, from claiming that Mo Yan advocates, let alone celebrates, censorship. I’ve written about problems of translation<\/a> in English-language reporting on China before; this example, in which reporters have treated the word jiancha <\/em>as if it were shencha<\/em>, is more of the same.<\/div>\n

Finally for the commentary, Charles Laughlin argues, in “What Mo Yan’s Detractors Get Wrong<\/a>” (an article that mentions Xi Chuan) that “when discussing the merits of Mo Yan\u2019s receiving the Nobel Prize in Literature, I think it is misleading for us to compare its validity to that of awarding the Peace Prize to Liu.”<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, in Stockholm, people are running naked <\/a>in protest <\/a>or else flash-mobbing<\/a> Red Sorghum<\/em> style:<\/p>\n