Modelling on The Sad Young Men
No aspect of cultural life in China after the 1900s has been more revered than the New Culture Movement and the May 4th Movement. The mere mention of these two movements stirs impassioned reflections among the old and ignites the sparks of imagination among the young: the monumental transition from classical to vernacular Chinese, the powerful essays advocating reform from the pages of New Youth, the fiery denunciation of traditional morality represented by the Confucian orthodoxy, the solemn gatherings of patriotic scholars, the daring literary breakthroughs of visionary writers like Lu Xun, the fervent advocators of science and democracy brandishing political pamphlets, and the burning idealism that ignited the campuses of Beijing. “Was there really a radical cultural and political revolt initiated by the seemingly weak students and scholars?”, present-day students often ask their teachers and parents. The answers to such inquiries must of necessity be “yes” and “no” - “yes” because the rebellion against tradition indeed mainly originated from college students, young scholars and writers whose youthful energy managed to penetrate the core of petrified morality and culture; “no” because what seemed so radical and transformative at the time can now be seen as a historical necessity, as the awakening of an ancient country’s profound cultural consciousness in the modern age.
Indeed, the cultural and literary rebellion of the 1910s and 1920s was a logical outcome of the chariot of history rolling ceaselessly onward. First, it is vital to remember that this spirit of revolution was not confined to China but reverberated across the globe in response to the shared trauma of world wars and large-scale modernization. America’s roaring 20s featuring indulgent escapist revelries and Bohemian immorality found an expression for the similar energy in China through the New Culture Movement and the May 4th Movement. Different from their American counterparts, China’s young radicals were propelled not by fatigue with responsibility and enforced gentility but by an impassioned commitment to reform the language and redefine the nation’s future. Their sober rebellion, fuelled by a genuine concern for the nation’s fate, and motivated by a burning sense of duty and patriotism, laid the groundwork for China’s modern cultural identity. Second, the profound national humiliation after the Twenty-One Demands in 1915 and the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, together with the much too evident intention of Yuan Shikai to restore the imperial system, made young intellectuals realize the necessity and the urgency for a radical change, both politically and culturally - the nation’s crumbling traditional institutions and toxic obsolete morality were ill-equipped to meet the demands of a rapidly modernizing world. They had to take action for the ancient nation to survive the chaos and thrive again.
The rejection of Confucian orthodoxy was, in any case, inevitable. The crashing weight of China’s ancient traditions - its literary formalism, rigid social hierarchies, and deeply ingrained moral codes - had long dominated its intellectual and cultural atmosphere. But as the twentieth century unfolded, the accelerating forces of modernization, the urgent and humiliating national crisis, and the forceful foreign encroachment made it increasingly difficult, almost impossible, for young Chinese intellectuals who had pursued a degree abroad or at least witnessed the enlarging rift between China and the world to accept inherited standards that bore little relevance to the current pressing domestic challenges. To rebel or not to rebel, as the generations passed, the disconnect between archaic customs and the imperatives of the modern age can only become more and more stark, until one day, the whole system would fall like a clay-footed statue and startle everyone from their wilful slumber. The loss of national sovereignty and intellectual stagnation acted as catalysts in the breakdown of traditional structure, prompting China’s youth to redirect their energies - not in idle destruction or unproductive pessimism, but in a disciplined and passionate call for reform that sought to dismantle an obsolete cultural order, a bleak social reality that had been dominating for too long.
The rebellion began with the collapse of an empire. Western countries carving up China while weak landlords and corrupt officials bowed to foreign demands became too unbearable a sight for a generation of educated youth. With their idealism sharpened by the biting and visionary critiques of radicals such as Chen Duxiu and Lu Xun, young intellectuals decided to “smash the iron house” of feudalism and Confucian traditions before the whole nation suffocated beneath its weight. As a result, the literary rebellion in the 1910s and 1920s was not just an artistic movement - more importantly, it was an attempt to survive and renew. Growing up with the “Four Books” and “Five Classics”, yet awakened by the fiery essays of New Youth and the impassioned university lectures proclaiming the death of the old culture, students were more and more convinced that burning away the traditional ways of writing essays and doing things and instead adopting the vernacular and the new was a heroic act, a symbolic message of rebirth. Accordingly, they began to revolt in increasing numbers - the poets in free verse, the novelists in stark realism, and the activists in protests. They wrote feverishly about “Mr. Science and Mr. Democracy”, debated Marxism and anarchism in teahouses, and experimented ceaselessly with vernacular Chinese in their literary works.
Students in Beijing set the pattern. By 1919, when the May 4th Movement erupted, the storm had already been brewing for a long time, and China’s young intellectuals in Beijing charged headlong into a war of their own. On the afternoon of May 4, over 4,000 students of Peking University and other schools marched from many points to gather in front of Tiananmen. They shouted such slogans as “struggle for the sovereignty externally, get rid of the national traitors at home”, “Give Qingdao back to us!”, “do away with the Twenty-One Demands”, and “Don’t sign the Versailles Treaty”. In June 1919, the Beijing government carried out the “June 3” arrests, in which nearly 1,000 students were arrested. However, this did not suppress the patriotic student movement, instead further angered the Chinese public and increased revolutionary sentiment. Workers and businessmen across the country went on strike in support of the students’ movement, marking the entrance of the Chinese working class into the political arena.
The historical significance of the New Culture and May 4th Movement still glows brightly today. According to David Der-wei Wang, it was “the turning point in China’s search for literary modernity”. The ardour of young intellectuals and college students indeed, as the name of the movement suggests, created a new cultural voice that managed to awaken the great lion of the East from its long slumber. Still reverberating in this ancient land today, the voice successfully blends the experimentations in literary forms, the discussions of Marxist philosophy, and the furious political protests into one great symphony to seek renewal and progression, inspiring the young people to continue their deep reflections and daring heroism.