| Summary: | 博士 === 國立成功大學 === 台灣文學系 === 103 === SUMMARY
The purpose of this study was to investigate the transformation of the concept of literature during the Japanese colonial period (1895~1945) in Taiwan. We approached this topic focusing on the transformation of this concept with the intention to broaden our discussion from the works of specific authors to the fundamental question of “what is the meaning of literature during the time?” Our subjects of observation included the process of formation of public opinion and education, and how such process regulated and revolutionized the concept of literature. The historical and political context during this transformative period was also analyzed. We seek to describe and identify the unique historic and cultural traits underlying the modernization of the literature in Taiwan by contrasting with the established perspectives of Western European language arts. Additionally, we emphasized on how the ruling class tried to blend political agenda into the creation of literature and sense of aesthetics; to the people, this is at the same time liberating but also an effective tool to strengthen their rule of the land.
INTRODUCTION
In English, Chinese, and Japanese languages, one can observed the inseparable bonds among the formation of modern literature, liberation of the people, the drive for national independence, and the reform of the modern societal orders. Taiwan in the late 19th century, as the island became a Japanese colony, could not help but going through a similar process. Derived from the unique circumstances of the time, Taiwan faced problems and at the same time exhibited remarkable energy. During the early days of the Colonial Period, the media have already developed the consensus of literature based on the Western European language arts. The educated class of the Chinese Taiwanese started to expand and transform from the traditional understanding of “knowledge” and “literary texts” into a blended and encompassing concept. However, due to the colonial rules, the people-centric and a justice-based world views could not take root for the concern of shaking the existing order. It was only until around 1920 that the new visions of Taiwanese politics amalgamated to form a cultural movement that challenged the Japanese ruling order. This movement also ignited the debate of the new vs. the traditional literature.
In addition to the general public’s revolt to the upper classes, the emergence of the cultural movement was also related to Japan’s change of colonial policies. Examining the colonial rule in the 1910s, incorporating arts and literary into structured education was a subtle attempt to development a “virtue system”. From imposing moral righteousness and etiquette to assimilating freedom of expression into education, the Taiwanese children gradually began to accept the form of literary education which embedded the messages of becoming loyal, patriotic, and self-regulated people of the civilized empire. This form of education was similar to the one used in mainland Japan. With high regards, children were expected to become autonomous individuals who cooperate with the colonial government. Investigating the common school curriculum, we can see that the official literature taught in school was very comprehensive covering all topics of interests in the society. At the same time, it also encouraged a dissociating attitude that promoted objective observation and subdued engagement. This form of education aimed to develop individuals who can be “harmless” to the government through the appreciation of art and beauty. The goal was to indoctrinate the students a sense of self-imposed regulation, and to become the unyielding defenders of the existing ruling system.
In the environment that stressed “individual autonomy” and “freedom of expression”, the teaching of the literature became a tool to deepen the colonial rule, however, it also carried the energy of liberation. From the formation of the literary circles among the Japanese in Taiwan, we can observe that the literati began to question the paradox within this form of modernization. As the studies of liberalism and democracy emerged, some intellectuals began to mend the widening gap between literary art and the society. During the leftwing activism of the latter half of 1920s, we observed criticisms to the existing aesthetic standards and hierarchy of literature. The progressive ideologies toward politics and literature were soon suppressed in mid 1930s. However, the Taiwanese people who were still burdened with the issues of basic civil rights could not as easily return to the pure forms of literary art.
In the Han society of Taiwan, the “new literature” was rooted in challenging the colonial governing system and expressing the interests of the authors (individual autonomy) and the readers (freedom of expression). But it is also undeniable that the Taiwanese appreciation and experience of the modern literature arose from the language, education, and the related infrastructures. Therefore, the ingrained sense of aesthetics and the ideals of the ruling class have ironically always been a part of the cultural movement toward liberation of the colony. Such contrast was clearly presented in the rhetoric regarding literature and the literary concept during the 1930s in Taiwan.
Such debate regarding the concepts of literature ceased during the War. In addition to the suppression of free speech, the government promoted political aestheticization in order to garner civilian support for the war effort. Literature became a tool for motivating the people and was an integral part of the political propaganda. However, contrary to the scheme of the Japanese government, some Taiwanese writers would derail to resume discussing the general principles of literature. The criticism and condemnation befell these acts demonstrated the tension between the colonial policy and the freedom of literary discussion. It also revealed the bottom line of freedom of expression during wartimes. From this perspective, the War tested the boundaries of the literature’s self-regulating property on multiple fronts; specifically the strong contrast between the Taiwanese resistance movement and the Japanese Nationalism. This view is important when discussing the concept and independence of literature during that period of time.
CONCLUSION
The current study identified the historical transformation of the concept of Taiwanese literature. We re-examined the use of the terms “literature” and “literariness”, and the orthodox and unconventional societal values contained within these concepts. We also questioned and reconsidered a number of the existing models of literary history. For example, the general (writing) and the specific (language arts) concepts of literature were not antagonistic to each other as if in a simple “old vs. new” context. Both concepts played to the tunes of progressivism and conservatism at different times to express the changes of the worldview. And they both have contributed to the struggle against institutional oppression (e.g. movements for freedom of speech and expression). By reconsidering the modern transformation of literature, we realized that the emergence of “language arts” should not be viewed as the totality of this process or simply a symbol of liberation and progression. Additionally, we may need to think beyond the confines of traditionally opposing constructs such as “form vs. content”, “skills vs. thoughts”, “literariness vs. pragmatism”, and “literariness vs. politics”, and to reconsider the purpose of each cultural movement. We particularly should examine how the conceptual transformations of literature helped resisting the oppression from the ruling class and shaping the new societal values.
|
|---|
