Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Interpretation of Hope




A Word-By-Word Close Reading of
Lu Xun’s HOPE
The Title
Hope”: desire combined with expectation; feeling of trust or confidence; prospect; promise.  In Wild Grass, this title is one of the few that do not shock the reader.  Not dismal as Epitaph and Dead Fire, nor evasive as The Wanderer and The Shadow’s Farewell, nor provoking as Revenge and Better Hell Lost.  On the contrary, Hope allures the reader to dive into it.  The title is a temptation.
The Date
Hope was written in 1925: Lu Xun was 44 years old.  It was also written on New Year’s Day; on that day, Lu Xun wrote a newspaper article, Enemies of Poetry.  On Jan 4, Lu Xun translated into Chinese three poems of Petofi; on Jan 12, another two.  Later in the month, Lu Xun composed three likewise ‘mildly’ entitled Wild Grass pieces: Snow (Jan 18), The Kite (Jan 24), and A Wonderful Tale (Jan 28).  This info, however, is not available to a non-researcher reader.  The close reading below will only take it into ‘marginal’ consideration.
¶ 1: My heart is exceptionally lonely.
My heart is”: not “I am.”  An opening of double effect: distance and intimacy.  “My heart” is technically a third person, whom the narrator observes, whose situation the narrator tries to understand, and with whose story the narrator chooses to begin.  The one-dimensional first-person narrative gains a sub-dimension; a ‘twosome’ comes into being: “my heart” feels, “I” empathize; “my heart” speaks, “I” write.  On the other hand, the uniqueness of “heart” enhances the intimacy of the twosome and hence the intimacy between the text and its reader: the reader is offered an occasion to share a personal moment and listen to a dialogue between one and one’s heart.  This creates the reader’s sympathy with and loyalty to a stranger—the first-person narrator.
Subversive intertextuality (presented here at the risk of premature conclusion): Lu Xun’s Epitaph confronts the reader with a dilemma of the heart’s “true taste”:
“… dug out my heart to eat, yearning to know its true taste. The torment too ruthlessly intense, so how to know the true taste? ...
“… once the torment dulled, ate my heart tranquilly. Already too stale, so how to know the true taste? …”
If so, how to know the heart’s true sentiment?
exceptionally lonely”: exception involves comparison and contrast.  Is “my heart” at this moment “exceptionally lonely” in comparison to that of “my” past self who has always been lonely yet never to this extent?  Or is “my heart” at this moment “exceptionally lonely” in contrast to those of others who, though living in the same world, are not at all lonely?  Both.  Then what makes this moment so exceptional in “my” life?  And what makes “me” so exceptional among “my” contemporaries?  At any rate: whereas the title gives an outlook, the opening line, i.e. the 1st paragraph, ends with an introverted gaze.  It is a gentle subversion of the title, for it replaces the title’s promise with an unexplained desolation.  But it is also in harmony with the title, for loneliness can beget contemplation, and contemplation can beget, among others, hope.
¶ 2: Yet my heart is very much at peace: no love or hatred, no mourning or joy, and no color or sound.
Yet”: a conjunction characteristic of Lu Xun—of his writing and thinking, both of which are winding routes with endless turns.  At each turn there is a line on the shield—the question asked by The Wanderer:
“What kind of place is that ahead?”
The narrator of the wanderer’s spirit does not stop at his heart’s sign, “I am exceptionally lonely;” rather, he heads in a different direction to explore what inside of his heart coincides with its loneliness.
at peace”: if “exceptionally lonely” gives a first impression of desolation, “very much at peace” offers at first sight a state of serenity that justifies the conjunction.  However, any reader who is familiar with Lu Xun would approach “yet” with caution; an obvious turn is usually intertwined with an invisible re-turn.
:”: the punctuation itself is a prompt, suggesting a specification of the phrase “at peace.”
no love or hatred, no mourning or joy, and no color or sound”: three pairs of spiritual-sensual counterparts.  While the intensity of the contrast between complementary sentiments declines, the problematic of “very much at peace” grows: if the state of tranquility leads to the utter absence of even the most elementary instincts and tones, is it still truly a blessing?  The preceding turn “Yet” is reversed back to desolation.

¶ 3: I am probably old.  My hair is already pale; is that not a very clear thing?  My hands are trembling; is that not a very clear thing?  Thus my soul’s hand is surely, too, trembling, its hair, too, surely pale.  
I am”: the first-person narrator comes to the front.  Is he going to offer an explanation of his heart’s loneliness and peace?
probably old”: the narrator’s statement does sound like an explanation; but he does not offer it with the confidence of absolute certainty.  Does being or getting “old” make him exceptional in comparison to his past?  Does being or getting “old” make him exceptional in comparison to his surroundings?  Or is it something else—something related but more complicated?  The adverb “probably” not only questions the propriety of the explanation, but also prompts the reader to ask himself: in what situation would I not be sure about my age, my aging, my self? 
My hair” & “My hands”: the narrator withdraws anew to study his body, as if trying to convince himself that he is old indeed: the color of his hair, the movement of his hands.  What happens in Paragraph 1 happens here: a silent, intimate conversation between a conscious observer and his unconscious parts—only from internal to external.
is that not a very clear thing? […] is that not a very clear thing?”: the narrator is seeking evidence—anything that could clarify his situation.  Had “probably” been erased from the preceding sentence, the parallels would be rhetorical questions.  But here, both the narrator and the reader have doubt.  Moreover, they doubt their doubt: why can we not be convinced by what we see?  What makes the situation so very unclear?
Thus […]”: A, thus B: A, therefore B; or A, because of B; indication of a two-way conclusion: either the body’s downfall leads to the soul’s, or the other way around.
my soul’s hand” & “its hair”: an uncanny scene: the narrator looks into a mirror to study his body; then, all of a sudden, he looks into his mirrored body and ‘sees’ his soul.  The portrait of the soul’s pale hair and trembling hand sharpens the narrator’s sensitiveness and vulnerability in the reader’s eyes.  In addition, the precise body-soul resonance speaks to the reader for the narrator’s honesty and credibility. 
Resonant intertextuality: a similar uncanny scene in The Shadow’s Farewell
I am but a shadow, which will bid farewell to you and sink into darkness.  Yet darkness will engulf me, yet sunlight will banish me to exile.
[…] I know not whether it is dusk or dawn.  I but raise an ash-black hand for now as if to empty a glass of wine.  When the time comes and I no longer feel the time, I will go far away alone.
In both texts, the “soul” and the “shadow” are portrayed as a Doppelgänger.
surely, too […] too, surely”: echoes of the repeated “is that not a very clear thing?”  Both parallels are foreshadowed by “probably” and prompt the reader to ponder the absent clarity and certainty (and the cause of their absence).
¶ 4: Yet this is a thing of many years ago.
Yet”: the second visible presence of the conjunction.  A turn, but to what direction?  
this is a thing of many years ago”: ambiguity of the pronoun “this”: it can refer back to the narrative above: the lonely heart, the pale hair, the trembling hands, and the aging soul.  This possibility is supported by the combination of “Yet” and “this” that creates an immediacy between Paragraph 3 and 4—an immediacy that makes “this” sound like a backward reference.  “This is a thing of many years ago,” then, implies: all this has been so for many years—an exceptional situation, whose unclearness and uncertainty has been haunting the narrator. 
But “this” can also refer ahead to the narrative below: Paragraph 5—a, new different situation.  This possibility, though at first sight against the text’s natural flow, is supported by the contradiction between “a thing of many years ago” and the previous text’s present tense and its agreement with the following text’s past tense.  Instead of completing what has been told, “this is a thing of many years ago” opens an untold chapter of the narrator’s earlier life.
The ambiguity of “this” turns the one-sentence paragraph into a bridge across the narrative.
¶ 5: Before this, my heart, too, brimmed once with the bloody singing voice: blood and iron, flame and poison, restoration and revenge.  Yet suddenly this all became empty, only now and then, having no alternative, did I deliberately stuff it with self-deceiving hope.  Hope, hope, using this shield of hope to rebel against that attack of the dark night in the emptiness, although behind the shield was still the dark night in the emptiness.  Yet just this bit by bit exhausted my youth.
Before this”: the ambiguity of “this” continues, complicated by the preposition “before”: if “this” refers back to the narrator’s current situation—the unclear, unsettling aging of his body and soul, then “before this” means one chapter before.  If “this” refers ahead to the narrator’s earlier situation to be revealed in Paragraph 5, then “before this” means two chapters before, i.e. a third stage of the narrator’s life:
Now: what happens—> “this”: what happened—> “before this”: what had happened
my heart”: when telling the stories of his earlier and still earlier life, the narrator goes back to the initial approach: he withdraws behind his heart to create a distance for observation, conversation, and reflection.  This invites the reader to an intimately shared retrospection.
too”: the word looks superfluous: wouldn’t the sentence without it be smoother and cleaner?  A second look at the adverb, however, appreciates its relevance: “too” expresses likeness: in the very manner of something else. “My heart, too” implies that “my heart” used to be like the heart of somebody else, to whom “I” bore affinity.  The suspicious “too” reaches out in truth to an earlier soul mate of the narrator.
“brimmed once with the bloody singing voice”: a precise counterpart of Paragraph 2: “brim with” vs. repeated “no…or…;” “the bloody singing voice” vs. “no color or sound.”  Furthermore, “the bloody singing voice” illustrates the younger narrator’s affinity to his then soul mate.
:”: an echo of the “:” after “at peace.”  The punctuation promises the reader a specification of “the bloody singing voice.”
blood and iron, flame and poison, restoration and revenge”: three pairs of opposites: the first item of each pair is ‘hot’ or related to physical and mental warmth, the second is ‘cold’ or associated with a sense of chill.  However, they can also be viewed as three pairs of equivalents: blood and iron are connected through sword and war; flame and poison are equal in violence and torture; restoration sometimes involves revenge, and revenge sometimes aims for restoration.  Whether opposites or equivalents, the tensions in and among these pairs suggest vibrancy and vitality: they are the lyrics of the heart’s long-elapsed ‘bloody songs.’
Yet suddenly”: the 3rd appearance of the perplexing “yet,” dramatized by “suddenly”: why “sudden”?  What has happened?  What could happen?  An unexpected turn to where?
this”: unlike the ambiguity of the previous “this”, its reference here is clear: “blood and iron, flame and poison, restoration and revenge.”
empty”: in Chinese, the word kong-xu (“empty, emptiness”) is easily confused with the word xu-kong (“the void”): both contain the same Buddhism-Daoism-colored characters, kong and xu, only in reverse order.  Regardless of their crossed etymologies, the two words are nuanced in Lu Xun’s writings.  For instance, “empty” or “emptiness” appears in Wild Grass. Dedication:
When I am silent, I feel whole; once I open my mouth, I feel empty.
The past life has already died.  From this death I attain Euphoria, because through this I know it once existed.  The dead life has already decayed.  From this decay I attain Euphoria, because through this I know it is not yet empty.
“The void” appears in The Shadow’s Farewell and Revenge II:
You are still expecting a farewell gift from me.  What on earth can I bestow?  Nothing, only the dark and the void as usual.  Yet I nonetheless want it to be only the dark, so that it may vanish in your white day; yet I nonetheless want it to be only the void, so that it shall never take a place in your heart.
The cross arose; he was suspended in the void.
A simplified, preliminary comparison: “emptiness” is hollow; “the void” is substantial.
“This all became empty,” therefore, addresses the simultaneous evaporation of all the substances with which “my heart” once brimmed. 
only”: the conjunction (meaning: “with this restriction, drawback, or exception; but (adversative); on the other hand, on the contrary”) instantly promises a way out of the emptiness.
now and then, having no alternative, did [I] deliberately stuff [it] with self-deceiving hope”: following the drastic, ruthless evaporation and a nonetheless promised way out, “hope” rises to the text surface; every word between, however, undermines its ground: “now and then” indicates inconsistency and unreliability; “having no alternative” indicates frustration and helplessness; “deliberately stuff … with” indicates hollowness and superficiality; “self-deceiving” indicates temporary illusion and ultimate futility.  Compelled by this specific context, the reader has to reconsider the title concept and reevaluate its character and force as a temptation.
I” & “it”: in the Chinese original, both pronouns are left out.  The absence of “I” deepens the narrator’s passivity and disheartenment; the absence of “it” enhances the reference’s ambiguity: “hope” is used to stuff both the empty heart and the emptiness itself.  As mentioned before, emptiness is hollow.
Hope, hope, […] this shield of hope”: triple repetition of the title concept immediately after its first emergence.  Ironically, not the power and finality of “hope,” but its weakness and vanity stand out.  “Shield,” in addition, defines the nature of “hope” as defensive-reactive (vs. aggressive-initiative).  
using […] to rebel”: like the previous sentence, the subject is cut off.  The narrator certainly fits in, but so does everybody else who uses “hope.”  In this sense, “rebel” characterizes whoever wears “hope” as armor to protect himself from “attacks”.
Intertextual reading: in Such a Warrior, the title figure has no “shield”—
He has no armor that prays to cow-hide and scrap-iron for help; he has only himself, but seizing what barbarians use: a single-throw spear.
Neither does the warrior “rebel;” he declares war:
               Above those heads is every kind of banner, embroidered with every form of grand title: philanthropist, scholar, writer, elder, youth, nobleman, gentleman… Beneath those heads is every form of garment, embroidered with every style of grand pattern: knowledge, virtue, national legacy, public opinion, logic, justice, Eastern civilization…
But he hoists the spear.
               […]
               He smiles, aims to the side for a single throw that does strike right into the den of their hearts.
The contrast between “spear” and “shield”—between “warrior” and “rebel”—recalls Nietzsche’s differentiation between master and slave morality. 
Another comparable argument see Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Of War and Warriors:
To rebel—that is the nobility in a slave. (Auflehnung—das ist the Vornehmheit am Sclaven.)  [...]
So live your life of obedience and of war!  What matters about long life!  What warrior wishes to be spared! (So lebt euer Leben des Gehorsams und des Krieges! Was liegt am Lang-Leben! Welcher Krieger will geschont sein!)
that attack of the dark night in the emptiness”: if “the emptiness” is hollow and to be stuffed, “the dark night in the emptiness” sounds paradoxical; “the emptiness in the dark night” would make more sense.  However, not only does “attack” work better with something more substantial, “the dark night” also distinguishes a unique perception of “the emptiness”—an intertextual ‘reversal’ of the paradox in Epitaph, “In all eyes saw nothingness.” 
This is a ‘reversal’ within the same text as well: the ability to penetrate “the emptiness” and perceive “the dark night” revises the solely passive image of the narrator or whoever uses hope for self-defense.  Their piercing eyes remind of Such a Warrior who, in “a formation of nothingness,” sees in every “nod” the enemy’s weapon and in every “vow” and testimony the enemy’s lies.
although”: similar to “yet (only, but)”: a sign for turn; unlike “yet (only, but)”: a backwards shifted focus—
A, yet (only, but) B: in spite of A, nevertheless B!
A, although B: in spite of B, nevertheless A!
behind the shield […] still the dark night in the emptiness”: the vagueness of “behind the shield” and the repetition of “the dark night in the emptiness” create ambiguity—
  1. The narrator predicts the attack of the dark night from one direction and gets ready with his shield of hope, only to find the same dark night attacking him from behind.  No matter how many times he turns, he fails; because he has only one shield, yet the dark night attacks him in all directions. The rebel is thus caught by “the dark night in the emptiness,” just like the warrior trapped “in the formation of nothingness”: both are fighting in vain an invisible, unpredictable foe. 
  2. The narrator stands behind the shield of hope to protect himself from the dark night’s attack, only to find the shield penetrated and his own self transformed and integrated into the dark night, so that his continued rebellion is rendered useless—nothing but a self-deceiving posture. 
  3. An even more devastating scenario: the narrator hoists the shield of hope to rebel against the attack of the dark night outside himself, only to find the dark night at the same time in himself.  The emptiness has long been internalized, so that the attack is also from within and the rebellion is also against oneself.  
All three possibilities, intensified by the adverb “still,” point out the fatality of “the dark night in the emptiness;” the conjunction “although,” however, transfers the whole power back to “using this shield of hope to rebel.”  The contrast between the futility of attempting to rebel and the persistence in attempting it anyway makes the rebel remarkable, for the conviction of the futility of his attempts somehow redeems his futile attempts.
An intertextual echo of the paradox in Epitaph:
[In all eyes saw nothingness;] in hopelessness found salvation…
Yet just this”: to follow a nonetheless affirmative statement with the turn sign “yet” undermines the affirmative.  The pronoun “this,” intensified by “just,” refers back to the attempt of “using this shield of hope to rebel” and its foredoomed, foreknown futility.
bit by bit exhausted my youth”: the absent subject returns to the text surface, but not as the first-person narrator, but as his “youth.”  The previously told stories of “my heart,” “my hair,” “my hands,” “my soul’s hand” and “its hair” bestow “my youth” an intimacy and vulnerability, which makes its bit-by-bit exhaustion—its bite-by-bite consummation—graphic and fierce.
¶ 6: Before, did I not know that my youth had already gone?  But I believed that the youth outside my body still existed: stars, moonlight, dead falling butterflies, secret flowers, owls’ ominous words, cuckoos’ weeping blood, laughter’s elusiveness, love’s soaring dance.  Although a desolate, illusory youth, yet after all: youth.
Before, did I not know that my youth had already gone?”: before what?  The vagueness of the adverb resonates with the beginning of Paragraph 5.  The rhetorical question, however, clarifies the sequence: the rebel’s consummation of youth accelerates aging.  “I [knew],” in addition, enhances the self-reflection suggested in “using […], although […].”
But”: the turn sign, like “yet” and “only,” suggests a way out of the grave of “my youth.”
believed”: the Chinese yi-wei (believe, assume, think, take for [usually mistakenly]), in contrast to zhi (know, realize) in the previous sentence, implies the narrator’s illusion and encourages the reader’s suspicion.  It renders unreliable the way out promised by “But.”
the youth outside my body”: the distinction between “my youth” and “the youth outside my body” resembles the distinction between “the dark night” in- and outside “me”.
: stars, moonlight, dead falling butterflies, secret flowers, owls’ ominous words, cuckoos’ weeping blood, laughter’s elusiveness, love’s soaring dance”: the colon’s third appearance, like the previous two, announces a specification or contextualization; the images chosen to exemplify “the youth outside” all speak against its ordinary codes: “stars, moonlight” instead of sunshine; “dead falling butterflies, secret flowers” instead of butterflies hovering above flowers; “owls’ ominous words, cuckoos’ weeping blood” instead of birds’ innocent, pleasant songs; “laughter’s elusiveness, love’s soaring dance” instead of laughter’s exultation and love’s undying rhythm.  Deprived of his own youth, the narrator perceives “the youth outside” to be cold, remote, obscure, solitary, damaged, ruined, morbid, mortal, uncanny, unsettling…, as if he sees them all against the background of “the dark night in the emptiness”—a background that renders everything deceptive and hollow.  Here, “youth” encounters “hope.”
Although a desolate, illusory youth, yet after all: youth”: the adjective couple “desolate” and “illusory” confirm the message of the filtered or ‘lensed’ images; but the combined conjunctions “although” and “yet” turn the subversive statement back into an affirmative.
¶ 7: Yet now: why so lonely?  Is even the youth outside my body, too, all gone?  Are the world’s young people, too, all aging?
Yet”: the conjunction turns the affirmative back again into a negative.
now”: the explicit time frame brings the text and its reader back to the present.
why so lonely”: an echo of the opening line, “my heart is exceptionally lonely.”  The absence of the subject blurs the distinction between “my heart” and “me.”  The unspoken question in the first two paragraphs is now spoken, as if the retrospect of the past urges the narrator to confront the present.  Also, the question is not only raised as the narrator’s self-dialogue, but also to the reader.
Is […] too, all gone? Are […] too, all aging”: echoes of Paragraph 3: the repeated “is that not a very clear thing?” and “surely, too […] too, surely.”  They echo both syntactically and thematically: in Paragraph 3 an implicit response to the unspoken question, “why is my heart exceptionally lonely?”  Here an explicit response to the spoken question, “why so lonely?”  In contrast to the pseudo-rhetorical questions and the semi-sureness in Paragraph 3, the paralleled pseudo-questions here convey a scary recognition strengthened by the adverb (that comes first in the Chinese original) “even.”
the youth outside my body” & “the world’s young people”: the former reaches back to Paragraph 6; the latter introduces a new element.  The parallel structure indicates that the latter belongs to the former and exemplifies it, just as the images listed above.  “The world’s young people,” therefore, are not linked to “the bloody singing voice” (that characterizes the young narrator), but to “dead falling butterflies,” “cuckoos’ weeping blood,” etc.: their “aging” is as unnatural and unpredictable as the chosen samples of “the youth outside.”
Intertextual readeing: Lu Xun’s 1931 Preface to an English translation of Wild Grass by Feng Yusheng that has never been printed:
“Astonished and shocked at the young people’s dullness and depression, I composed Hope.”   
Preliminary conclusion: Lu Xun, like Hope’s narrator, considers his youth “already gone” and himself “probably old;” at the same time, he is provoked by the young people’s lack of young energy and spirit—lack of “blood and iron, flame and poison, restoration and revenge,” which he associates with other ‘morbid phenomena.’  This, in turn, proves that Lu Xun is indeed still young at heart—the reason why, while surrounded by ‘premature elders,’ he feels “exceptionally lonely.” 
¶ 8: I have no choice but myself to wrestle the dark night in the emptiness.  I lay down the shield of hope, I hear Petǒfi Sándors (1823-1849) song of “Hope”:
Hope is what?  A prostitute:
Bewitching all, devoted to all;
Wait until you sacrifice considerable treasure – your youth
– she abandons you.
“I have no choice but myself to wrestle the dark night in the emptiness”: the opening is a striking contrast to that of Paragraph 3, “I am probably old”: right at the dead end of a full—powerful, eventful, colorful, and faithful—life, the narrator regains his youth and hope by discovering the way out in himself. 
“Have no choice but” sounds first passive as “having no alternative” in Paragraph 5; but “myself to wrestle” instantly reverses the tone and manner: from the forced resignation to a bold decision, from the rebel with “this shield of hope” to a naked war.  The choice of the verb is crucial: not “face” or “confront,” because “the dark night in the emptiness” is, as revealed above, everywhere and invisible; not “grasp” or “hold,” because the enemy is, like the “thing of nothingness,” intangible and evasive, never to be comfortably contained within one’s hands; still not “challenge” or “fight,” because that would be less concrete, immediate, and primitive.  Only “wrestle,” as Mary Carol comments, “manages to reach down to the eternally barbaric-naturalistic core of man and implies an ongoing struggle of which I think a ‘Warrior Poet’ would approve.”  Also, only “wrestle” delivers a graphic portrait of the narrator’s simultaneous war against “the dark night” out- and inside his body, i.e. “the dark night” and his dark self.
As a whole, the opening line of the paragraph stresses not only the fatality of “the dark night in the emptiness,” but the finality of the narrator’s anti-fatality war as well, which consequently confirms the preliminary conclusion that it is the aging narrator who, alone, possesses the young energy and spirit.  Up to this point, the narrator’s life can be outlined as—
The bloom of youth: a heart brimmed with “the bloody singing voice”
The doubt of youth: a heart deprived of all ‘substances’
The consummation of youth: an empty heart stuffed with “self-deceiving hope”
The elapse of youth: an empty heart whose hope lies only in the “youth outside”
The revival of youth: an empty heart refilled with a self-imposed task
“I lay down the shield of hope, I hear Petofi Sandor’s song of ‘Hope’”: paired sentences addressing the coincidence of two happenings. 
The first sentence is related to the preceding line in two ways—as cause and consequence: because the elapse of “the youth outside” dissolves the last temptation of “the shield of hope” (Paragraph 6-7), “I have no choice but myself to wrestle the dark night.” Or: “my” self-imposed mission to start a ‘naked war’ like a barbaric warrior requires that “I” shall not use any protection—not even a false shield.
The second sentence brings up an apparently new figure who in reality recalls the ‘soul mate’ hinted in Paragraph 5: “Before this, my heart, too, brimmed once with the bloody singing voice.”  The affinity is reinforced by the coincidence: the moment “I lay down the shield of hope,” Petofi’s song of “Hope” becomes audible to “me.”  The narrator comes through his own experience to the conclusion of Petofi’s poem: hope is a prostitute who abandons you once you sacrifice your youth (Paragraph 5). 
Moreover, the narrator’s experience expands Petofi’s poem in two directions: first, his act of laying down “the shield of hope” is not a gesture of surrender, but an expression of abandonment—once he realizes hope’s nature, instead of allowing himself to be abandoned, he abandons her first.
Second, the contrast between the “dullness and depression” of “the world’s young people” and the young energy and spirit of the “probably old” narrator renders an alternative to Petofi’s original, which defines both youth and hope anew:


Hope is what?  A prostitute:
Bewitching all, devoted to all;
Wait until you sacrifice considerable treasure –your youth
–she abandons you.
Youth is what?  A prostitute:
Bewitching all, devoted to all;
Wait until you sacrifice considerable treasure –your hope
–she abandons you.

¶ 9: This great lyric poet, Hungarian patriot, for the sake of his fatherland died on the spear of the Cossacks, already 75 years ago.  Tragic is his death, yet more tragic, that to this day his poetry has not died.
This great lyric poet, Hungarian patriot, for the sake of his fatherland died on the spear of the Cossacks”: this line manifests the narrator’s admiration of Petofi, whom Lu Xun quoted in his article written on the same day, “Enemies of Poetry,” and whose poetry Lu Xun translated 5 times in the same month.  The prompt of the line is primarily the tone: it shares the passion, vigor, and firmness of the opening of Paragraph 5 and 8:
[…] my heart, too, brimmed once with the bloody singing voice: blood and iron, flame and poison, restoration and revenge.
I have no choice but myself to wrestle the dark night in the emptiness.
There is also a word choice that attracts attention: “spear.”  In Chinese, dun, the shield, and mao, the spear, build a new word, mao-dun, which means (self-)contradiction and paradox.  To lay down the shield and expose oneself distinguishes the life of a ‘warrior poet,’ but also leads to his death on the spear of his enemy.  This resonates the Dead Fire’s dilemma: “freeze to death” or “burn out”?
“[…] already 75 years ago. Tragic is his death, yet more tragic, that to this day his poetry has not died”: the 7th appearance of “yet” begets a perplexing logic: don’t most poets wish their poetry never to die? Don’t most poets write so as not to die?  Why is the survival of poetry “more tragic” than a poet’s death?
One possible approach: if a literary work addresses ‘timely observations’ or contemporary problems, it shall ‘die’ as time goes by and the problems are solved.  “That to this day his poetry has not died,” on the contrary, suggests that the same problems addressed in Petofi’s poem are still alive at present—that “75 years” are gone for nothing.  His song of “Hope,” in particular, applies to today’s young people: they allow themselves to be bewitched by the prostitute Hope and keep squandering their treasured Youth for her, until she impoverishes them and abandons them.  “Tragic” is, from this point view, not the continued life of Petofi’s poem, but the continued up-to-dateness and soundness of the message conveyed by his poem: lessons are revealed, but not learned.
¶ 10: But miserable is life!  A man as daring and valiant as Petǒfi eventually, facing the dark night, stopped walking and gazed back at the boundless East.  He said: 
               Despair is as hollow and deceptive as hope.
 But”: the conjunction suggests a turn from the double tragedy—the tragic death of the warrior poet Petofi and the tragic endurance of his poem Hope’s message.
“miserable is life!”: the Chinese ke-can, miserable, is a synonym of ke-bei, tragic; the exchangeability of the two adjectives suggests the sequence: tragic is death—>yet more tragic is the endurance of problems—>but tragic is life!  The combination of “But” and the exclamation mark turns lamentable complaints into stoical acceptance and indisputable affirmation.
“A man as daring and valiant as Petofi eventually, facing the dark night, stopped walking and gazed back at the boundless East”: the line is a forced flash back.  After informing the reader of Petofi’s death as a self-sacrificing “patriot,” the narrative jumps back to the turning point of Petofi’s life and lights up the other side of his personality: “daring and valiant” is no longer in the sense of romantic heroism, but in the sense of self-reflection and –skepticism.  Proof of maturation is not to take a blind dive, but to simultaneously face the dark night and gaze at the rising sun.   
“He said:  Despair is as hollow and deceptive as hope”: the quote from a letter of Petofi to his friend on 1847.7.17 (2 years before his death) is dramatized by the narrator as a line spoken with the ‘gaze back.’  The message of this line reverses the message of the 1845 poem and reinforces the preceding line’s affirmation.
The essay could have ended here.
[To Be Continued!]

No comments:

Post a Comment