【 民主中国首发 】  时间: 10/28/2017              


作者: 崛武昭


























































































（张裕 译）


China will face dilemma and inconsistency for Nobel Prize between Literature and Peace. -One thought after the death of Liu Xiaobo


    After having been engaged in PEN Internationals activities for years, I have had a fun time getting acquainted with many Nobel Prize Laureates for literature through various PEN events. Because of this, when October arrives, almost every year I was chased by Japanese journalists working for major newspapers. They were expected to scoop this exciting news for readers, thus it was essential that they keep their eyes open so as not to miss the chance if ever it happened for their patriot. In other words, I faced a dilemma between pain and pleasure almost every year.

    It was a painful job to keep my eyes wide open as to who would be the winner each year. In order to prepare the list of finalists, I had to ask some of my colleagues at PEN International. Also, I had to ask the most established publishers, as well as literary critics. The labor and costs involved in this research were substantial and time consuming.

    However, this was not the end of my endeavor, instead it was just the beginning. Soon after this preliminary work, I had to proceed to the next stage, which was to screen only a few of the final candidates amongst many. Then, the game started for betting. One after another, the Japanese critics and journalists started calling me.

    No matter how much or little I know about world literature, it does not matter, because those who are chasing the same rabbit are everywhere and share almost the same information. It is fair game, or at least speculation.

    A few reasons can be easily pointed out. First, the Selecting Criteria of the Swedish Academy, (this is the entrusted institution with the task of choosing a winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature), has never been announced publicly.

    I would say that even the Academy would face difficulty to define the criteria clearly, because they have to reflect the expectation of the global community through different periods of time. Plus, there are so many processes involved. And final assessment will be governed by the discussion of 18 members of the Swedish Academy. The Academy used to be a Gentlemens Institute, but now thanks to structural change, no less than a third of its membership has to be women. In addition, preliminary selection committee members with expertise in literature had to deal with the hardest works, the background of each candidate, the application of formal rules for the nomination of candidates, the choice of literature, the clarification of various recommendations, and etc. etc. There is no possibility of leaking the criteria assessment and/or principles as a whole to the outside world.

    It will be safe to guess that the process is similar to a weather forecast, which is always based upon a certain degree of prediction even in this super-computer world. Therefore, every literary critic can easily say like

it was just as I had predicted, after the official announcement was made.

    In those circumstances there was one special case, which I precisely predicted. Japanese literary journalists did not believe me even though they came over to see me to hear my prediction. It was the 2012 Nobel Prize for Literature. Of course, among many strong candidates I stressed upon one Chinese writer, but no one actually believed that he would win. They wanted to believe other writers had a better chance. It was natural for them to do so. They simply wanted to trust their own conviction.

    The Academy announced Mo Yan, a Chinese writer, as the Nobel Prize winner for the year 2012. After the announcement, a few gossips and critics spread comments worldwide. Some of them were really convincing and worthy of believing. But, generally speaking, those gossips and critics rumors wont be proved. So, lets leave it to everyones imagination, or suspicion. However, I dare to say that there happened a coincidence relating to this award. From 2009 to 2012, I did concentrate on following the trajectory and behavior of Mo Yan as well as the Chinese government. While tracking him from place to place, finally, I reached my own conclusion. Most of my observations were learnt through the various events of PEN International.

    At present the world should cautiously watch Chinas tremendous socio-economic progress as it rises to become a super power state in line with the United States and Russia. It is therefore no wonder when we talk about her greatness appealing to the world mainly in economics and politics, but also increasing its influence in the cultural and literary worlds.

    I can give you another, yet similar case with detailed background, which was the London Book Fair held in 2009. At that time, Chinas counterpart was the British Council and they invited China as an honorary guest state. Naturally, the British intellectuals, including English PEN, made a fuss and openly protested the decision. Intellectuals severely criticized the restrictions on freedom of speech and stated that it was funny to invite such a country where all publications, including media, were under the tight grip of government censorship.

    However, the British Council was up front and defended Chinas position stubbornly. They made it clear saying that keeping engaged in ongoing, long-lasting, yet patient negotiations, would only lead to a change in society of China, and claimed that this particular decision was a part of this expectation. European powers, including France and Germany, also began to look at China as the biggest and most promising market for economic growth.

    Thanks to the success of this Fair, the Chinese government was encouraged and decided to move further on in the literary and publication areas. It officially joined the International Publishers Association, called GAPP (General Administration of Press and Publication).

    Going back to the London Book Fair, to the best of my knowledge, there was registered more than 180 Chinese publishers as official members, and 57 artists participated. Interpreters, public relations, administrative officers, and executives of the Communist Party were on the Chinese delegation, which was the largest delegation of the Fair. Among them I saw Mo Yan.

    I had the chance to speak with him briefly, but ended the discussions with very light and friendly greetings. One year ago, before the London Book Fair, Japan PEN invited him as the main guest speaker to the event Natural disaster and literature, organized by Japan PEN in celebration of the 70th anniversary of Japan PEN in 2008.

    He was with the secretary general of China PEN, so obviously he was dispatched by the Communist Party. He was confident and eloquent. So why not take this opportunity to talk about the lapsed membership problem of Chinese PEN?

    China PEN actually walked away from any activities of PEN International since the Tienanmen Massacre. I emphasized my ideas for them to come back to the table without arguing political matters. Instead, I stressed there is room for both of us to talk about literature in a friendly atmosphere, but with one condition. PEN International Assembly is an open place for anybody who firmly believes that the freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, thus China has to share the same floor with Tibetan and Uyghurs in exile, Taiwanese, and Chinese poets and writers based overseas for any reasons. It was a pretty intense and tough talk, but he was patient.

    I thought of another interesting occasion which took place at Frankfurt Messe, the Worlds biggest Book Fair, in 2009. China sent a big delegation that was beyond my imagination and exactly the same situation took place. China was the Guest of Honor Country of the year 2009 and many German writers complained and protested against the invitation issued by the Frankfurt Messe organizer.  The excuse of the Messe organizer was the same as at the London Book Fair, and repeated the similar statement. One good thing which the organizer tried to compromise on was to accept Chinese and Tibetan writers in exile, or dissidents such as Bei Ling, Yang Lian, Dai Qing and Gao Xingjian (nationalized French, but born in China) as participants in the same symposium. China desperately tried to stop their participation. Meanwhile, Beijing and Shanghai Book Fairs were also held in China, where Mo Yan was under the limelight.

    And in October, the Nobel Prize for literature award was announced. The Chinese Government highly and proudly declared that China had now become a great power even in the literary world. The Chinese People were also excited with this news. It was exactly the award that the Chinese government wanted so badly, and the way they managed it worked perfectly.

But, when Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Peace Prize, ironically none of the Chinese media said even one word.

    I clearly remember the behavior of Mo Yan when I first met him at the symposium held in Tokyo. And based upon my observations (I may be wrong), I guessed that Mo Yan himself did evaluate positively the value or significance of the Nobel Prize award for literature, as far as he continues to keep living in China. He must know the benefit of the award both economically and politically.

    At the same time, some questions arose in my mind as to the decision of the Swedish Academy. I presume that the decision can be seen as a compromise of the Swedish Academy given the standing of China in the future world. The Swedish Academy must have re-evaluated the impact and merit of these two Nobel prizes given to Chinese even though Peace award is nominated by the Norway Nobel commission (Gao Xingjian who was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature in 2000, and Liu Xiaobo, the founder of Independent Chinese PEN, who gained the Peace Prize in 2010.) At the time I felt that the Swedish Academy might try to improve its relationship with China in the foreseeable future.

    In any event, Mo Yan and Gao Xinjian met in Tokyo for the literary event, which was a rather embarrassing encounter for them, but when I look back at the scene, I can say that it was destiny for them. Both of them were decent and very quiet men. Despite that I could easily sense the tumult of their life experience and their conviction that lurks from the bottom of their hearts, which brewed a calm atmosphere around them. Indeed, it was palpable.

    After this event, I visited Beijing again wishing to invite Mo Yan as the guest speaker for PEN International Congress held in Tokyo. However, Chinese authorities gave me an excuse on his behalf. They said he returned to his hometown to take care of his daughter, who was due to give birth anytime and this was his immediate priority. This conversation made me conclude that the Chinese authorities must be guarding him for some reason. 

    And then in September 2017, there was some amazing news. Liu Xiaobo, who was still in prison when he received the Nobel Peace Prize, was released from jail. Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in jail for the alleged reason that he was attempting to overthrow the state. The authorities explained that the reason he was released was that he was suffering from terminal liver cancer and needed to receive special medical treatment outside of prison.

    However, as time went on, the world came to know that his health condition was serious and was deteriorating quickly. Naturally, Liu Xiaobo and his wife expressed their wish to receive the best treatment possible in Western Europe, specifically in Germany. The German government responded quickly and expressed their willingness to accept them. At the same time, European human right activists, PEN International, Amnesty International, and many others, started massive campaigns and asked for the release of Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia: This is exactly the same as the death penalty. We cant understand the fact why his liver cancer had deteriorated in such a short time. Chinese authorities have a responsibility to explain explicitly why his cancer progressed so quickly to the terminal stage.

    Then, shocking news followed that Liu Xiaobo had died in a Chinese hospital. Immediately, the Chinese authorities stated it was the wishes of his family that the body be immediately cremated and his ashes scattered in the sea. Their final comment stated It was his own wish.

    Regarding this tragedy, the world accused the Chinese authorities of causing this tragic death and allowing him to die in prison without the treatment he needed.

    The death of Liu Xiaobo symbolizes the serious suppression by the Chinese government against democracy, freedom of expression, and human rights.

    The Chinese government thus ignited the voice of protest from all over the world and a series of memorial events have been taking place everywhere and our still continuing.

    Of course, after the protest movement of the students involved in the 1989 Tiananmen Incident, a major crackdown followed in China and many Chinese students and writers were forced to escape abroad and to live in exile. Exposed to democratic societies in the West, writers strengthened criticism against China through various means of expression. This led to the establishment of Independent Chinese PEN and Liu Xiaobo as one of its founders being elected as the second president even though he had been living in China since 1989.

    Up to this point I have tried to overview the whole situation of how China dealt with Nobel Peace and Literature Awards under various circumstances.

    Last, but certainly not least, I would like to add one more special remark about the death of Liu Xiaobo. His death created a new page for the future history of China, and it will never ever be wiped out no matter how long the single party dictatorship regime lasts, or whether the democratization of China will take place.

    In other words, we can say that his death set up the concrete measures to face the solid, yet invincible truth. To the contrary, the Chinese government had been bogged down deeply by so called unfaithful facts.

    We should remember another Nobel Literature prize awarded to an author who wrote about China almost 80 years ago. The book was The Good Earth, written by Pearl S. Buck. She painted Chinas landscape with the colorful life of farmers on the agrarian soil. What we learned from history is that most outstanding Chinese literature was created under a dictatorship or autocratic regime, and at the same time it is a fact that there is no significant difference between peace and outstanding literary works.

    It is no doubt that the loss of Liu Xiaobo under the spirit of the realization of an open democratic society will be surely inherited by the next generation worldwide, along with the words of No enemies, No hatred.

    Simply speaking, the Nobel Awards Laureates that China won after the revolution were Liu Xiaobo for Peace and Mo Yan for Literature. However, there exists major difference in the decision-making process between the two as far as the Chinese government is concerned. It is so obvious if you visit the Nobel Museum in Stockholm. There is no distinction at all between the two laureates as far as their exhibit presentation is concerned. However, China appreciated only the Literary Award and issued an official statement proudly showing its confidence: Modern Chinese literature has proven itself to be at the top level in the world, whereas China neglected Liu Xiaobo with respect to the Peace Prize. To the contrary, his life was destroyed in prison like breaking a living tree into pieces.

    I have rather good experiences and memories of China. Whenever I visit China, I always try to meet as many people as possible regardless of whether they are apparatchik of the Communist Party or ordinary citizens on the street. They are generally kind, warm-hearted people. That is why I dare to say that the fundamental problem which China has been facing comes from the one-party system with strong partisan mentality.

    They monopolize the whole social system and tend to ignore all kinds of social contradictions. Society thus functions as a prison with a coldblooded face. But, it is still possible to find some free, untouched space for anyone if they trust their own mind and heart. Then, any government is unable to touch them. They can only destroy mankind physically. Literature can remain and be sustainable forever as it is in pursuit of human dignity and so is the case of Peace.


关键字: 刘晓波
文章点击数: 25322

english twitter