Preview

Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences

Advanced search

From “Construction of Own-Based Culture” to “Sinification”: Historical Meaning of the Discussion of the 1930s

https://doi.org/10.30727/0235-1188-2019-62-12-35-63

Abstract

The article focuses on the Chinese discussion of 1935 on “Cultural Construction on a Chinese Basis” (Zhongguo benwei wenhua jianshe) and its influence on the subsequent “Sinification” (Zhongguohua) movement. The author analyzed the content of the “Manifesto of Cultural Construction on a Chinese Basis” (January 1935), which advocated a selective approach to both Chinese and Western cultures in order to enable China’s politics, society and thought to regain their national characteristics. It is underlined that compromise proposal to “not cling to the old” in Chinese culture and not to “follow blindly” Western culture has drawn critical response from Chinese adherents of Westernization. Hu Shi interpreted the idea of “Chinese own-based culture” as embodiment of the old thesis of combining “Chinese basis” (Zhong ti) with “Western application” (Xi yong). He maintained that the force of inertia of traditional culture is very strong, and, therefore, anxiety about the disappearance of national characteristics from the life of Chinese society is unfounded. Relying on materials of Chinese primary sources, the article shows that during the discussion the center of attention shifted from the sphere of culture to the outstanding issues of socio-economic development and international relations. Tao Xisheng, a proponent of “construction of own-based culture,” urged the “semicolonial Chinese” to oppose capitalist aggression, to create national thought and to take China as a starting point in assessing all events and trends. He prioritized tasks of gaining national independence and sovereignty, countering the expansion of capitalist powers, carrying out organized and planned advance of China. The emphasis on the factors of time and place demonstrated that the discourse on “own-based culture” was not divorced from practice. Participants of the discussion summarized China’s needs as improving people’s livelihood, developing the economy and ensuring the survival of the nation. The transition from the discussion of cultural construction to deliberating on the problems of the state took place against the background of the growing need for national consolidation in eve of the full-scale conflict with Japan. The pre-war discussion of “own-based culture” strengthened the positions of Chinese nationalism and cultural conservatism. In the late 1930s, Chinese Marxists launched their “Sinification” movement, which helped to bridge the gap between foreign theory and Chinese practice, thus paving the way to a positive understanding of Chinese characteristics. The article concludes that in modern China the contemporary relevance of the ideas of “construction of own-based culture” is determined by the growing attention to the preservation of identity and independence of Chinese culture in the era of rapid economic development and advancement towards the goal of national revival.

About the Author

Alexander V. Lomanov
Primakov National research Institute of World economy and International relations, russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation

Alexander V. Lomanov – Ph.D. in History of Philosophy, D.Sc. in Modern History, Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Deputy Director for Scientific Work, Head of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies.

Moscow



References

1. Borokh O.N. (2017) Tao Xisheng and the Shihuo Journal: Chinese Economic History through the Angle of Western Thought]. Far eastern Affairs = Problemy Dal’nego vostoka. 2017. No. 6, pp. 88–100 (in Russian).

2. Burov V.G. (1983) Philosophical heritage and ideological struggle in China in the first half of the twentieth century. In: The Philosophical Heritage of the People of the east and Modernity (pp. 224–226). Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

3. Delyusin L.P. (1988) Struggle over Sun Yat-sen’s Ideological Legacy. In: Delyusin L.P. (Ed.) Social and Political Thought in China (Late 19 h – early 20 th Centuries) (pp. 199–242). Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

4. Dirlik A. (1976) T’ao Hsi-sheng: The Social Limits of Change. In: Furth C. (Ed.) The Limits of Change: essays on Conservative Alternatives in republican China (pp. 305–331). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

5. Fung E.S.K. (2010) The Intellectual Foundations of Chinese Modernity: Cultural and Political Thought in the republican era. New York Cambridge University Press.

6. Guo Hongjuan (2012). 20 Shiji 30 niandai “Zhongguo benwei de wenhua jianshe guankui – yi wenhua minzuzhuyi wei shijiao [A Glimpse of “China-Based Cultural Construction” in the 1930s: From the Perspective of Cultural Nationalism]. Luoyang shifan xueyuan xuebao = Journal of Luoyang Normal University. 2012. No. 12, pp. 64–67 (in Chinese).

7. Hu Shi (1998). Shi ping suowei Zhongguo benwei de wenhua jianshe [Attempt to Assess the So-Called Construction of China’s Own Culture]. In: Ouyang Zhesheng (Ed.) Hu Shi wenji [Collected Works of Hu Shi] (Vol. 5, pp. 448–452). Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe (in Chinese) (Original work published 1935).

8. Ju Wei &Yang Yi (2013). “Zhongguo benwei wenhua jianshe xuanyan” ji qi xiandai qishi [“Manifesto of Cultural Construction on a Chinese Basis” and Its Contemporary Inspirations]. Hunan shehui kexue = Social Sciences in Hunan. 2013. no. 4, pp. 52–55 (in Chinese).

9. Krivtsov V.A. (1974). Maoism and the Great Han Chauvinism of the Chinese Bourgeoisie. Far eastern Affairs = Problemy Dal’nego vostoka. 1974. No. 1, pp. 74–87 (in Russian).

10. Li Baihe (2012). 20 shiji 30 niandai de Zhongguo benwei wenhua lunzhan dui makesizhuyi zhongguohua de yingxiang [The Influence of Discussion on China’s Own Culture of the 1930s on the Sinification of Marxism]. Shandong shehui kexue = Shandong Social Sciences. 2012. No. 9, pp. 13–17 (in Chinese).

11. Li Baihe (2015). 20 shiji 30 niandai “xueshu zhongguohua” de changdao yu makesizhuyi zhongguohua [The Initiative of “Academic Signification” and the Signification of Marxism in the 1930s]. Zhexue dongtai = Philosophical Trends. 2015. No. 5, pp. 10–15 (in Chinese).

12. Li Baihe (2017). 20 shiji 30 niandai Zhongguo makesizhuyizhe de wenhua zijue [Cultural Consciousness of Chinese Marxists in the 1930s]. Beijing daxue xuebao: zhexue shehui kexue ban = Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Sciences). 2017. No. 5, pp. 15–22 (in Chinese).

13. Lomanov A.V. (2014). Liberalism and Westernization in the Disputes of the 1930s about the Future of Chinese Culture. Far eastern Affairs = Problemy Dal’nego vostoka. 2014. No. 5, pp. 112–125 (in Russian).

14. Luo Zhitian (2018). Tansuo zhutixing: jindai Tianxia bengjie hou guojia yu wenhua de jinzhang – jian ji “Zhongguo benwei wenhua” de zhenglun [Exploring Subjectivity: The Tension between the State and Culture after the Disintegration of the All-Under-Heaven in Modern Era: Concurrently on Debates on “China’s Own Culture”]. Shehui kexue zhanxian = Social Science Front. 2018. No. 1, pp. 84–101 (in Chinese).

15. Mamayeva N.L. (Ed.) (2013). The History of China from Ancient Times to the Beginning of the 21 st Century. volume 7: republic of China (1912–1949). Moscow: Nauka – Vostochnaya literatura (in Russian).

16. Sheng Banghe (2011). 20 shiji 30 niandai guanyu “benwei wenhua” de da taolun [Great Debates on “Own Culture” of the 1930]. Shanghai caijing daxue xuebao: zhexue shehui kexue ban = Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and economics (Philosophy and Social Sciences). 2011. No. 5, pp. 3–9 (in Chinese).

17. Shi Chunfeng (2010). Jin 80 nian guanyu Zhongguo benwei wenhua wenti lunzhan yanjiu zhuangkuang zongshu [A Summary of Situation in Research in the Debate on China’s Own Culture over the Past 80 Years]. Anhui shixue = Historical research in Anhui. 2010. No. 5, pp. 105–114 (in Chinese).

18. Tao Xisheng (2014b). Wei shenmo fouren xianzai de Zhongguo – da Hu Shi “Shi ping suowei Zhongguo benwei de wenhua jianshe” [Why Deny the Current China – Response to Hu Shi’s “Attempt to Assess the So-Called Construction of China’s Own Culture”]. In: Zhu Feng (Ed.) Tao Xisheng juan: Zhongguo jindai sixiangjia wenku [Tao Xisheng Volume: Chinese Modern Thinkers Library] (pp. 386–388). Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe (in Chinese) (Original work published 1935).

19. Tao Xisheng (2014а). Duiyu “Zhongguo benwei wenhua jianshe xuanyan” de buchong shuoming [Additional Explanation to the “Manifesto of Cultural Construction on a Chinese Basis”]. In: Zhu Feng (Ed.) Tao Xisheng juan: Zhongguo jindai sixiangjia wenku [Tao Xisheng Volume: Chinese Modern Thinkers Library] (pp. 411–412). Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe (in Chinese) (Original work published 1935).

20. Wang Xinming et al. (1990) Women de zong dafu [Our Common Response]. In: Luo Rongqu (Ed.) Cong “xihua” dao xiandaihua: Wusi yilai youguan Zhongguo de wenhua quxiang he fazhan daolu lunzheng wenxuan [From “Westernization” to Modernization: Selected Works of Discussions on Chinese Cultural Trends and Development Path since May 4] (pp. 475–478). Beijng: Beijing daxue chubanshe (in Chinese) (Original work published 1935).

21. Wang Xinming et al. (2013) Zhongguo benwei de wenhua jianshe xuanyan [Manifesto of Cultural Construction on a Chinese Basis]. In: Tian Xiaoqing (Ed.) Minguo sichao duben [Reader on Intellectual Trends of Republican China] (Vol. 3, pp.. 209–212). Beijing: Zuojia chubanshe (in Chinese) (Original work published 1935).

22. Yu Keping (2010). “Westernization” vs. “Sinicization”: An Ineffaceable Paradox Within China’s Modernization Process. In: Tian Yu Cao, Xueping Zhong, & Liao Kebin (Eds.). Culture and Social Transformations in reform era China (Vol. 2, pp. 151–195). Leiden: Brill.

23. Zhong Tian’e (2018). 20 shiji 30 niandai zhishi fenzi de wenhua zijue zixin ji qishi [Cultural Consciousness, Self-Confidence and Inspiration of Chinese intellectuals of the 1930s]. Jiangxi shehui kexue = Jiangxi Social Sciences. 2018. No. 8, pp. 149–158 (in Chinese).

24.


Review

For citations:


Lomanov A.V. From “Construction of Own-Based Culture” to “Sinification”: Historical Meaning of the Discussion of the 1930s. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences. 2019;62(12):35-63. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30727/0235-1188-2019-62-12-35-63



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 0235-1188 (Print)
ISSN 2618-8961 (Online)