<I>Mutual Aid</I>
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 16(2)/2019: 89-104 The Earliest Chinese Translation of Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid Yinli GE School of History Nanjing University 163 Xianlin Avenue, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China 1950796387@qq.com Abstract: In 1908, the first and second chapters of Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid were first translated into Chinese by Li Shizeng, greatly influencing Chinese anarchists. Li Shizeng followed Kropotkin’s scientific argument of anarchism and strengthened the viewpoint for praising “public” and suppressing “private”. When translating Kropotkin’s thoughts, Li Shizeng focused on political revolution, glossing over the criticism of the capitalist economy, and barely referenced Kropotkin’s original anarchist communist ideology. Keywords: Mutual Aid, evolution, revolution, fraternity, anarchism ,QWKHIDPRXV5XVVLDQDQDUFKLVW.URSRWNLQ ǜDzǿǽǍǸDzǷǾDzDzǯǵȄ ǗǽǻǼǻǿǷǵǺ -1921) published the book “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution” (hereinafter referred to as “Mutual Aid”) (1908: 1). In 1908, Li Shizeng, who studied in France, translated the first and second chapters of the book and published them in the Chinese magazine New Century in Paris. Li Shizeng’s translation of Mutual Aid had a profound impact on the dissemination of anarchism in China (Cai, 1984: 354). However, while studying anarchist beliefs in modern China, previous scholars paid little attention to Li Shizeng’s translation of Mutual Aid in 1908 (Cao, 2003:122- 124; Scalapino & Yu, 1961:8-9; Jiang & Li, 1991; Dirlik, 2006; Tang, 2011; Xu & Liu, 1989; Lu, 1990). Based on Li Shizeng’s translation in 1908, the author compared the differences between the translated text of Li Shizeng and the original text of Kropotkin, using other relevant texts to study how the first generation of intellectuals in modern China who came into contact with the anarchist ideology, namely the scholars of the Paris Group, understood and accepted Kropotkin’s theory of mutual aid. © 2019 Yinli GE - https://doi.org/10.3726/CUL022019.0006 - The online edition of this publication is available open access. Except where otherwise noted, content can be used under the terms of the Creative 89 Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0). For details go to http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/ Yinli GE / The Earliest Chinese Translation of Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid I. THE ORIGINAL ENGLISH TEXT AND THE TRANSLATED CHINESE TEXT Li Shizeng’s translated version in 1908 did not include a Chinese preface corresponding to the original English preface but instead added a concise introduction at the beginning of the textδZhen, 1908, no.31ε, followed by the first two chapters of Mutual Aid. Instead of the English text, Li Shizeng likely based his version on the French translation of Mutual Aid. In the first two chapters of Mutual Aid, Kropotkin carefully examined the social life of invertebrates, insects, birds and other animals in nature. Li Shizeng’s translation preserved the basic structure of the original English text, without severely distorting Kropotkin’s original meaning. The serious problem inherent in this translation is that parts of the original text were omitted by Li Shizeng. Some of the keywords at the beginning of each chapter were not translated. Numerous words and sentences in the text, such as the biological examples or opinions of others cited by Kropotkin, were either directly deleted or summarized briefly. Li Shizeng did not strictly translate the original text. In most cases, he translated the text based on his own understanding, leaving out modifiers and only summarizing the original text. Take the following sentence for example: “Rousseau, who saw in nature but love, peace, and harmony destroyed by the accession of man.”( Kropotkin, 1908:5) The translation of Li Shizeng is, “ঘợѹӇφ‘н⢟᜕ૂ’Ⱦ”(Zhen, 1908:31) Li Shizeng translated the three English words “love, peace, harmony” into one Chinese character “ૂ” (meaning “harmony”), and he omitted the modifier “destroyed by the accession of man”. Though the translation retained the meaning of the original text, this simplified translation obscured the complex connotation of the sentence, causing semantic distortion. In addition, most of the annotations in the original text were deleted. Although his translation has deficiencies in understanding and accuracy, it does not largely affect the expression of the core idea present in the text. Li Shizeng’s selection and adoption of translated words are worthy of in- depth exploration. Mutual aid is the core idea expressed and the most commonly used phrase in the original text. Li Shizeng translated it as “ӈ ࣟ” (literally meaning “mutual aid”). After that, although many scholars translated the term “mutual aid”, most of them adopted the translation of “ ӈࣟ” with little change. Another core concept is evolution. By 90 Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 16(2)/2019: 89-104 convention, Li Shizeng translated it as “䘑ौ”. It is worth noting that the term “䘑ौ” can be translated to many English words besides “evolution”, such as “development”, “growth”, etc. The author will later explore Li Shizeng’s expression and application of the concept of “䘑ौ”. Influenced by the scholars of the Paris Group, Li Shizeng translated “justice” into “ޢ䚉”, “social common action” into “ޢѿ”, and “the security of the common wealth” into “ޢᆿ”. Words such as fittest, better, marvelous, higher, surest, were all translated into “㢥”, appearing 22 times in the translated text. Phrases such as “the best conditions for survival”, “the highest development”, and “the highest position” were translated into “᭯㢥”, appearing three times. These translated words are terms repeatedly mentioned by the scholars of the Paris Group when expressing the view of social revolution (1907). “᭯㢥” is a gradual revolution, while “㢥” is the purpose of revolution: “‘䘑ौ’ is also a kind of revolution, which aims to achieve the purpose of ‘㢥’.”(1907:561) In addition to translating the original text, Li Shizeng added nine “translator’s annotations” (one of which is not directly indicated in the text as a translator’s annotation). The “translator’s annotations” summarize the interpretation of humans and society based on biological phenomena, explaining facts from the perspective of natural science in the typical writing style of Li Shizeng. He cites the ant colony as an example to convey that the pursuit of communism and opposition to militarism are not only the natural instincts of human beings, but also the “inherent nature” of animals (Zhen, 1908, no.32). He also claims that tigers and leopards use their talons and fangs to kill other animals rather than to defend themselves, another ideal similar to militarism (Zhen, 1908, no.44). Kropotkin’s investigation of social life proves that although tigers and leopards have talons and fangs, they are sparse in number; while other animals are legion, surviving through “gregariousness” rather than hooves or horns (Zhen, 1908, no.44). Therefore, Li Shizeng argues that the mechanisms of cosmopolitanism and resistance to power derive from “nature”. (Zhen, 1908, no.44) In two other “translator’s annotations”, Li Shizeng expounds on the meaning of revolution. He perceives the law as the protection of private interests, and the revolution of human society is the “fight between public interests and insatiable private demands.” (Zhen, 1908, no.48) The lower animals and the higher animals, the primitive humans and civilized people, 91 Yinli GE / The Earliest Chinese Translation of Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid resist private interests and protect public interests to an extent. These instincts all come from “the security of the common wealth” and “mutual aid”, two moral elements of revolution. His viewpoint espouses that a bird flock’s attack on lazy and selfish birds is not fundamentally different from a revolution of human society, despite differing in size and complexity (Zhen, 1908, no.48). The contrast between “public” and “private” is not only reflected in the translator’s annotations, but also corresponds to the contrast between the individual and the collective in the original text. Li Shizeng translated “the war of each against all” as “⿷ᐧᮂޢ”. Li Shizeng compared the mutual aid of bees and ants to those of human beings and expressed the desire for mutual aid among peopleθ stating “Humans are different from bees and ants. If humans conduct mutual aid like bees and ants, based on the theory of evolution, it is foreseeable that humans will become more united and advanced.” (Zhen, 1908, no.35) He also stressed the role of intelligence. He opined that horses are gregarious, but are not powerful enough to contend with humans. Though humans are physically weaker than horses, they are far more intelligent (Zhen, 1908, no.46). Kropotkin deemed that we should understand the “extermination” proposed by Darwin based on its extended meaning. In Li Shizeng’s view, the extended meaning of “extermination” is “᭯㢥” (literally meaning “evolution”), “The evolution of creatures... competition does not necessarily happen among the same species; extermination does not necessarily happen among the same species. Therefore, we should view competition and extermination based on their extended meanings. From the perspective of original meaning, it indicates that ferocious creatures survive and the weak ones die out. From the perspective of extended meaning, it implies that the creatures that constantly evolve themselves survive and the unchanged ones perish. There is a big difference between the two, and it cannot be ignored.” (Zhen, 1908, no.49) The translator’s annotations reflect Li Shizeng’s thoughts on the original text and his viewpoints on the different ideas in Mutual Aid. Li Shizeng strengthened the linear progress reflected in the term “evolution”, extracted the ideological resources from the text and drew scientific examples from the Mutual Aid by adding translator’s annotations to oppose militarism, praising “public” anarchism and suppressing “private” anarchism, while espousing the role of intelligence, Li Shizeng didn’t passively accept the idea of mutual aid as some scholars thought.