THE UNTAMED OUTSIDE: IMAGINATION and PRACTICE of AGRARIAN COMMUNE in PEOPLE's REPUBLIC of CHINA a Dissertation Presented to Th
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE UNTAMED OUTSIDE: IMAGINATION AND PRACTICE OF AGRARIAN COMMUNE IN PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Xiangjing Chen August 2017 © 2017 Xiangjing Chen THE UNTAMED OUTSIDE: IMAGINATION AND PRACTICE OF AGRARIAN COMMUNE IN PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Xiangjing Chen, Ph. D. Cornell University 2017 This dissertation examines the historical practices and literary representations of “agrarian commune” from 1949 to the contemporary time in People’s Republic of China, focusing on its ambiguous role in the heterogeneous formation of Chinese modernity. Current Chinese literary studies have not explored the literary imagination of “agrarian commune” and its relation to modernity. Combining the Marxist political- economic analysis of China’s socio-economic reality with the textual analysis of literary works, this study seeks to explore how this “non-capitalist” formation of “commune” articulates with the “capitalist sector” in the uneven structure of China’s national economy in a complex way: on the one hand, it creates an “internal border” within China and serves for the internal primitive accumulation for the state; on the other hand, it produces the resisting elements that continually contest and disrupt the logic of capitalism, and opens the possibility for alternative practice of the “common life” that transcends the logic of capital and state. This study unpacks the complexity of “commune” in different periods through the reading of literary works. Chapter One focuses on the “collectivization movement” in socialist period and explores Zhao Shuli and Liu Qing’s divergent conceptions about the “agricultural cooperative” in relation to the state. Chapter Two focuses on the “underclass literature” that captures the living conditions of rural migrants under the “household contract responsibility system” in the era of market economy and global capitalism. Chapter Three examines the recent effort of reviving the “commune” and “common life” in the “New Co- operative Movement” promoted by New Left intellectuals after the year 2000, focusing on Wang Anyi and Liu Jiming’s novels. By looking into the different ways that the collective land ownership interacts with capital and the state throughout different stages of modern China, this study shows how the rural “outside” plays both a “productive” and a “subversive” role in the global uneven structure of capitalism, thereby enriching the discussion of “uneven development” in Marxist scholarship, and filling a blank spot in current Chinese literary studies regarding the rural modernity. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Xiangjing Chen was born in Nanning, China. She received her B.A. and M.A. in Chinese Modern Literature from Peking University in 2007 and 2010, and entered the PhD program of Asian Literature, Religion, and Culture at Cornell University in 2011. While her research field is Chinese literature, her research interest covers various theoretical and historical topics across disciplines, including modernity of East Asia, Chinese socialist culture, Marxism, and translation theory. She passed her defense in June 2017, and will start working as a post-doctoral fellow at the Institute of World Literatures and Cultures at Tsinghua University, China in the fall of 2017. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation would not be possible without the intellectual guidance and academic support of my teachers at Cornell University. I am most profoundly indebted to my chair Professor Naoki Sakai, whose critical insights and erudition have fundamentally inspired and shaped this project. Although I do not specialize in his field of Japanese intellectual history, his rich knowledge on translation theory, modernity of East Asia, Japanese intellectual history, and critical theory have greatly opened my mind and enabled me to explore questions about China and Asia from new perspectives, and always inspired me to think of questions from a higher level. I would like to express my deep gratitude to my committee members Professor Brett de Bary and Professor Chen Jian. I benefited a lot from Professor Brett de Bary’s instructions on translation theory, Japanese literature, and Japanese language, and learnt a lot from her academic rigorousness and sophisticated reading of text. Moreover, her generosity and kindness has helped me through the most difficult moments before and after I transferred into the Department of Asian Studies. Professor Chen Jian in the Department of History has given me support that far exceeds the obligation of a minor member. He not only gave me a lot of substantial advice and knowledge about Mao Zedong and China’s socialism, but gave me full support in every sense; he is a patient reader of my chapter drafts, and is always responsive to my inquiries. Without the instructions, suggestions, and feedbacks of my dissertation committee as well as their ardent support and generous help, I could not have completed this dissertation. vi I would like to give my special thanks to my Japanese teachers Yukiko Katagiri, Misako Suzuki, and Sahoko Ichikawa, who not only have taught me the Japanese language indispensable for relevant research, but also have made my school life at Cornell University much more fun and memorable. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues at Cornell for their precious friendship and intellectual support during my stay in Cornell, especially Ning Zhang, Jinjing Zhu, Junliang Huang, Clarence Lee, Sujin Lee, Nari Yoon, Wahguan Lim, Shiau-Yun Chen, Jack Chia, Jahyon Park, Junning Fu, Cheow-Thia Chan, Kun Huang, Shu-mei Lin, Qilin Yang, Andre Keiji Kunigami, Andrea Mendoza, Ryan Buyco, Andrew Harding, and Paul McQuade. Last but not least, I would like to thank my family for their unconditional love and support through all these years. And especially thanks to my husband, Xie Jun, who has given me tremendous support, love, patience, as well as his professional advice and intellectual support, without which this dissertation could not have been completed. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: What Is Commune? ……………………………………………………. 1 Marx and the Ambiguous Commune .………………………………………………1 Commune as Alterity ……………………………………………………………….9 Discursive Positions about Chinese Commune for Later Marxists………………...15 The “Outside,” or the Positionality of Asiatic Mode of Production ……………… 44 Agrarian Commune in People’s Republic of China: An Outline …………………. 51 Chapter 1 The Common in Socialist Literature on Collectivization ………………….56 Zhao Shuli’s “Sanliwan Village”: Indigenous Commune in Rural Society ……… 64 Liu Qing’s “The Builders”: A Modern Subject that Transforms the Community …87 “Departmentalism”: Collective versus State ……………………………………. 104 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………….118 Chapter 2 The Indispensable and Impossible Family in Post-Fordist China ………. 120 Dissolution of the Common ……………………………………………………. 120 Small-Holder-Migrant and “Double Labor Market” ……………………………. 128 The Indispensable and Impossible Family ……………………………………… 139 Family in Small Holership: Unremunerated Labor ……………………………… 146 Precarious Life and Crisis of Labor Power in Underclass Literature …………….156 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… 174 Chapter 3 “Exodus” of Labor and “New Common” Toward the Future …………… 176 Seeking the Common from within Capitalism …………………………………... 180 Anonymous Multitude and the World of Common in Wang Anyi’s Novel ……..193 Reconstructing a Human World: Imagining New Co-operative in the 21st Century .................................................................................................................. 204 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………… 222 Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………. 224 viii ix INTRODUCTION WHAT IS COMMUNE Marx and the Ambiguous “Commune” “Commune” is a controversial term in Marxist discourse, denoting multiple meanings and indicating a complex turn of Marx’s thought. A systematic articulation seems to be necessary to capture the difficulty and hesitation of Marx in contemplating the highly theoretically charged and extremely ambiguous “commune” in Marx’s thoughts. Generally speaking, we can hastily say that in some places, as in “The British Rule in India” (1853), “commune” denotes an archaic form of social formation as pre-capitalist mode of production, which is regarded as prior to the rise of capitalism and could be developed into the capitalist mode of production. However, in other places, such as Grundrisse, although “commune” is still regarded as an archaic one, it is designated as a mode of production outside the “history”, that it is intimately linked with the stigmatized term of “oriental despotism” as well as the “Asiatic Mode of Production” which generated controversial debates in later socialist states. But, thirdly, there is a positive way of understanding “commune,” when Marx in his later years discussed Russian Commune or “Paris Commune,” it is imagined to as the base of “communism” that could overcome the capitalism, and is consciously linked to the struggle of Paris Commune and therefore linked to the imagination of an alternative future or another temporality. This demands us to pay more attention to particular junction of these three paths. That is the point in Grundrisse, where Marx denotes various kinds of precapitalist 1 social formations that are characterized by the incomplete development of private property and individual in modern sense. The three major types of “commune” – clan