Printer Friendly

A critical review of Japanese scholarship on modern Chinese fiction and translation studies.

Introduction

In a short article entitled "Discussing the Inadequacy of Eliminating the Classical Language" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the well-known translator Lin Shu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1917) criticizes the shift from literature in the classical to vernacular language, which at the time was taken place in Beijing University, explaining that once the classical language was eliminated from the educational institutions, only Japanese scholars would be qualified to teach it in China. (1) Despite progress made since these words were written, Lin Shu's insight, extrapolated to Chinese literature research, remains as valid today as it was at the height of the May Fourth Movement. As advanced as Chinese studies are, particularly regarding recognized authors such as Lu Xun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] or Zhou Zuoren [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], a more traditional approach to the question of modernity as proposed by a number of writers has not been studied with accuracy and scholarly details. (2) While it is true that attention has been directed to the matter, and that recent years have witnessed new groundbreaking studies in a variety of neglected topics and authors, scholarship has remained faithful to its own inherited tradition, accepting at face value many biased accounts against non-revolutionary figures, (3) such as accusations of Lin Shu's defective translations, Liu Tieyun's treachery, and Li Boyuan's plagiarism.

Besides outstanding advances in classical Chinese literature conducted, for instance, by Hayashida Shinnosuke [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1932) and Takagi Masakazu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1912-1997) on pre-Tang literature, and by Arai Ken [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1929) and Uchiyama Chinari [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1928) on poetry and fiction, (4) research on late nineteenth century and early twentieth century Chinese literature has been highly influenced by political trends in China and Japan, especially after the improvement of political relations between both countries following the Sino-Japanese Joint Statement signed in 29 September 1972 (Sato 1987; Wong 1988, 114). It was also at this time that politically-oriented scholarship shifted to a more open and revisionist position which included late Qing literature and translation studies, providing readers with solid philological foundations for further expansion. Unfortunately, a large bulk of this research, published over the last forty years, remains virtually unknown outside Japan. (5)

In order to introduce this research to English-language scholars, this paper begins with offering a historical background on the development of late Qing and early Republican fiction studies in Japan, covering research societies, publications, and scholars in the field. Second, it discusses questions related to new directions in the study of the May Fourth Movement. Third, it addresses groundbreaking studies on writers and translators outside the main stream of research, covering Lin Shu, Liu Tieyun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and Li Boyuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Further discussion examines thematic studies, limiting ourselves to editorship, detective fiction, and Japanese political fiction--themes that were highly relevant because their authors engaged in important questions related to cultural reforms and the evolution and formation of modern fiction, its genres, and concerns.

Historical background

Japanese scholarship on modern Chinese fiction is usually categorized into three generations, based on the motivations and scope of their research: the first generation emerged in the 1930s and 1940s when Chinese literature was introduced to Japan. The second wave began in the 1950s, following the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949. Finally, a third generation appeared in the 1970s after the Sino-Japanese Joint Statement signed in 1972 (Wong 1988, 113-14, 123). (6) Although division into "generations" can be historically misleading, it can be useful for analytical purposes to examine the trends and motivations behind Japanese scholarship.

The roots of Japanese scholarship on this literature can be traced back to the Chinese Literature Association [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chugoku bungaku kenkyukai) founded in March 1934 by the alumni Okazaki Toshio [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1909-1959), Takeuchi Yoshimi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1910-1977) and others from the Chinese Philosophy and Literature Department of the Imperial University of Tokyo, although it was not formally established until August 4, following Zhou Zuoren and Xu Zuzheng's [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1895-1978) visit to Japan that year. (7) This group constituted what many authors consider the first generation of Japanese scholars engaged in modern Chinese literature. They had an interest in leftist politics--related to the authors they studied--and employed Chinese literature as a mirror to the problems of Japanese modernization (Wong 1988, 114). Their association also published a modest journal, Chinese Literature Monthly [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chugoku bungaku geppo, later Chugoku bungaku), which started circulation on 5 March 1935 and lasted through ninety-two issues until the dissolution of the association in March 1943. Takeuchi's interest in the literary movements of contemporary China had started in the mid-1930s, when Japanese forces had begun to occupy the mainland. For the Japanese scholar, the occupation caused a deep sense of guilt which may have contributed to his passionate study of Chinese leftish literature. However, after the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, all remorse was gone (Iida 2002, 49; Hoppens 2015, 48; Takeuchi 2004, 151). In the same month, he wrote a short communication for the Chinese Literature Monthly, "The Great East Asia War and Our Determination (A Declaration)" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ( [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), where he expressed his pride in Japanese militarism and nationalism (Takeuchi 1942, 481-84). This communication was shortly followed by his resignation from the society, linked to his refusal to involve the society in a war propaganda event, and his exile to the Chinese front (Uhl 2011, 317).

The journal was later restarted in March 1946 and ceased publication in late May 1948 with its 105th issue. (8) Apart from providing introductions to and criticism on Chinese literature and Sino-Japanese relation topics, it incorporated a column on translation theory, which ran from November 1940 to December 1941 (from Issues 66 to 79). The Chinese Literature Association conducted translations of modern Chinese writers, including Lu Xun and Zhou Zuoren. One of their most important accomplishments was that they challenged the accepted standards of translation theory and sinological studies in Japan. During the Meiji [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Taisho [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] periods (1868-1926) was "an almost ideological drive" on translation which was determined by Japan's foreign relations with China and the West. China and Chinese literature and translations were important because of their "mediating role [...] in the encounter with the West," and the way foreign texts were imported was not conditioned by faithfulness, but rather by how the text could be made useful for Japan (Haag 2011, 15-16). Takeuchi Yoshimi (1941), one of the founders of the Chinese Literature Association, considered translations "to be the ultimate interpretation of the original work" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (645). This new approach, at odds with translation theories favored during the first decades of the century, confronted scholars with new methodological problems such as how to properly translate literature and the relations between source and translated materials.

After his return from China, Takeuchi Yoshimi, who had become one of the most respected experts on Lu Xun after his breakup with the Chinese Literature Association, established two new groups: the Lu Xun Research Association [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Rojin kenkyukai) in 1952, which published thirty-five issues of their homonymous journal from 1953 to 1966, and Friends of Lu Xun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Rojin no tomokai) in 1954 (Calichman 2004, viii). However, Japanese scholarship still remained circumspect for some years, and it was generally dependent on studies in the mainland until the 1970s. Wong (1988) explains Takeuchi's views and methodology "influenced the other Japanese scholars very deeply. This may explain why the Japanese scholars in the past had been paying their attention selectively to a few Chinese writers only" (114). (9) Tarumoto's (2009) meticulous survey of twenty-four Japanese works on modern Chinese literature shows that "Japanese scholars during this period were paying attention to the literary trends of China" and "because common belief was being repeated [...] new views did not appear": they uncritically followed previous research published in the continent, focusing on writers such as Lu Xun or Zhou Zuoren and adopting a hostile attitude toward those authors who opposed the May Fourth Movement (206). (10)

Two important societies emerged at the time: the Ia Society [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Ia no kai) and the Chinese Literary Arts Research Association [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chugoku bungei kenkyukai). Te first was founded around 1973 and published the Ia journal (later Ia iho [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Ia tokkan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) until 1989, edited by Nakajima Toshio [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1947) and Shimomura Sakujiro [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1949). It focused on post-Cultural Revolution literature but also edited, with the Chinese Literary Arts Research Association, a Guide of Modern and Contemporary Chinese Literature Research [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chugoku kingendai bungaku kenkyu gaido) in 1985.

On the other hand, the Chinese Literary Arts Research Association was founded in March 1970 by Aiura Takashi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1926-1990) from Osaka University of Foreign Studies (now School of Foreign Studies), with the assistance of Kamaya Osamu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1936-2013), Yamada Keizo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1937), and Ota Susumu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1930-2012). It publishes its semi-annual journal Wild Grass [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Yaso) since October, 1970, as well as the monthly Bulletin of the Chinese Literary Arts Research Association [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chugoku bungei kenkyukai kaiho) since May, 1974. It was originally formed by a dozen members but has since expanded to include over 230 scholars from across the country (Sugawara 2015, pers. comm.). Both societies belong to the second generation of Japanese scholars specialized in modern Chinese literature, who inherited the trends of their previous colleagues: although the number of authors they treated expanded, they remained, due to their politically-centered view of research, limited to the inner circle of the authors associated with the May Fourth Movement (Wong 1988, 115).

Because their main purpose was to learn from the process of modernization in China, Japanese scholarship limited itself to preconceived notions, "focusing itself on the literary trends of China" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [...] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Tarumoto 2009, 206). Among the inherited trends they followed was their criticism of late Qing fiction which originated in "literary revolutionaries" such as Chen Duxiu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Hu Shi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. These authors did not hesitate to attack any advocator of Chinese traditional values or classical Chinese, arguing against the quality of their translations. Later I will show that this criticism was baseless but served to discredit traditional writers and, for a long time, also restricted scholarly interest in them. As Tarumoto (2008b) explains:
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] The plan of making Lin Shu a
representative of the old literati was accomplished with splendid
success. Because of this large movement, the criticism against Lin's
translations became deep-rooted for a long period of time, and it
continues until today. (402)


Following the Sino-Japanese Joint Statement on 29 September 29 1972, an improvement in the political relations between the two countries lead to an increase in academic exchanges (Wong 1988, 123-24). (11) Soon after, the Cultural Revolution ended with the death of Mao Zedong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and the open policies implemented by Deng Xiaoping [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in 1978--the Four Modernizations [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (si ge xiandaihua)--opened the markets to foreign investment from Western countries and Japan. In that same year the Sino-Japanese Joint Statement was ratified by both parties. The Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and China was signed on 12 August 1978.

As a result, many scholars shifted their interest to a curriculum-oriented approach. These changes also led to the depoliticization of research and allowed new authors to be the subjects of their scholarly exploration, "triggering] a broad interest in China on every level of Japanese society, prompting a veritable 'China boom'" (Sato 1987, 1). (12) Years after the establishment of the Ia Society, Tarumoto Teruo, a lecturer at Osaka University of Economics at the time, founded in 1977 the Society for Late Qing Fiction Research [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyukai), whose main purpose was to address the problem of "credibility" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (shinpyosei) of the source texts and to organize the basic materials with the creation of indexes and catalogues (Tarumoto 1977, 112). Translations have since been evaluated following a source-oriented approach: a good translation is that which closely reproduces the original and has internal consistency in the use of its terminology, without abridgments or additions.

Indexing of late Qing and early Republican sources can be traced back to Sun Kaidi's [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1902-1986) indexes of Chinese novels from Tokyo and Dalian [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] published in the 1930s, and Qian Xincun's [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (better known as A Ying [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) 1954 Index of Late Qing Plays and Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Wan Qing xiqu xiaoshuo mu) published in Shanghai, which listed 1,070 (later expanded to 1,107) novels. After the foundation of the society, indexes started to be published in its journal, Late Qing Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu shosetsu, originally Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyu), until the combined efforts of Tarumoto Teruo, Nakamura Tadayuki [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1915-1993), Nakajima Toshio [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1947) and Yamauchi Kazue [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] led to the completion of the Index of Late Qing and Early Republican Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu Minsho shosetsu mokuroku) in 1988 and a new edition in 1997 which included 16,014 works, 4,974 of them being translations. Up to this day, the society publishes annually an electronic version of this index. (13)

Apart from indexing, the society has published two journals: Late Qing Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu shosetsu), which stopped publication in December 2012, and Late Qing Fiction Communication [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu shosetsu kara), an electronic quarterly published since 1986. Some articles have also been collected in book form, A Chronology of Late Qing and Early Republican Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ( Shinmatsu Minsho shosetsu nenpyo, 1999) listing original works and translations from 1840 to 1919, Collected Studies on Late Qing Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ( Shinmatsu shosetsu soko, 2003) gathering nine essays on Liu Tieyun and Li Boyuan, and Collected Essays on The Commercial Press [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shomu inshokan kenkyu ronshu, 2006) assembling historical essays on the relations between The Commercial Press and the Japanese publishing house Kinkodo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], a Sino-Japanese joint venture from 1902 to 1913. Active contributors include Tarumoto Teruo, who has worked extensively on editorship relations between China and Japan, Chinese translations of Sherlock Holmes and The Arabian Nights, Liu Tieyun's The Travels of Lao Can and, more recently, Lin Shu; (14) Watanabe Hiroshi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1968) on the identification of Chinese translations from this period; Sawamoto Kyoko [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] on Liu Tieyun and Lin Shu; and Sawamoto Ikuma [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] on the history of Chinese publishing houses.

One of the major achievements of the third generation of Japanese scholars has been that their scholarship transcends the limitations inherited from Yoshimi's "centerstage" approach, in which scholars had been restricted within the boundaries of a notion of modernity established by "revolutionaries" such as Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi. These authors shared a common denominator: they wrote against tradition and classical literature. Today we are inclined to perceive them as central figures in the process of modernization because of our historical perspective: they are the ones who molded China and they have, to some extent, the monopoly of modernity. They are, briefly said, the victors who wrote their history. However, their paradigm was not the only one, and we know now that there were other competing visions to the problem of modernization, as it has been acknowledged by scholars such as Hung-yok Ip, et al. (2003, 504), Michael Hockx (2003, 5), Jon Eugene von Kowallis (2006), Shengqing Wu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2013) and so on. (15)

Although Japanese scholarship aims to demonstrate that these reformist ideas were an innovation pioneered by late Qing authors rather than by Republican revolutionaries, their most relevant achievement has been their revisionist approach to the criticism raised against late Qing authors. This has tremendous consequences for our understanding of modern Chinese literature because, if these authors were unfairly treated, then their particular conceptions of modernity and the role they played in introducing new ideas to China should be reevaluated. It is to them we now turn.

Author-centered Studies

Lin Shu

Japanese scholarship on Lin Shu has increased over the last few years. This is not surprising given not only the number of works he translated and the political ostracism he suffered, but also his efforts in social reform (Gao 2009). Japanese studies on Lin Shu can be divided into three categories: identification of unknown translations, comparative translation studies, and the "cases of false accusation" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] against him. (16)

The studies of the first category have been dominated by a number of papers published by Watanabe Hiroshi. Watanabe's methodology has set a standard for cross-linguistic treatment of late Qing translations of Western fiction, presenting a comparative analysis of the source and the translated text, together with a modern Japanese translation and a resume of the whole work, followed by a list of foreign names and their Chinese translation--an important instrument for improving our understanding of how foreign names were translated. Offering a contextualization of both translator and translatee, Watanabe presents a comparative evaluation between contemporary Japanese translations and Lin's renderings.

Both comparative translation studies, which deal with the quality of Lin Shu's work and the sources employed, and the reevaluation of the criticism against him have been mainly conducted by Tarumoto Teruo and collected into two separate books, Cases of False Accusation against Lin Shu (Rin Jo enzai jikenbo, 2008) and Research Essays on Lin Shu (Rin Jo kenkyu ronshu, 2009). The first volume includes nine essays that deconstruct the received imagery from the May Fourth period with philological accuracy. After a long and meticulous introduction covering Lin Shu's conflicts with Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi and other devotees of the Literary Revolution regarding the substitution of classical Chinese by vernacular and some rumors about their dismissal from Beijing University, (17) Tarumoto deals with "The cases of false accusation against Lin's Shakespeare" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku Sheikusupia enzai jiken") that were voiced by Liu Bannong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Qian Xuantong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1918; under the pseudonym Wang Jingxuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), Hu Shi (1918), Zheng Zhenduo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1924), A Ying (1937, 182) and others. According to the A Ying, Lin Shu is to be criticized for rendering Shakespeare's theatrical works into prose, instead of preserving the "play form" of the original. Tarumoto traces the origin of this idea back to Liu Bannong and Hu Shi, who used it as an excuse to attack Lin Shu's prose and his treatment of Shakespeare's plays. After showing that Lin Shu's translation was in fact based on Charles and Mary Lamb's prose adaptation of Shakespeare, Tales from Shakespeare (1807) and, thus, that he was being faithful to his source, Tarumoto continues with another noted case of false accusation: the translation of Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906)'s Ghosts (1881), a work which was also rendered into prose by Lin Shu. After tracing back to Zheng Zhenduo, the modern criticism against this work, the author compares different English translations of Ibsen with Lin Shu's rendering, concluding that the original work employed for its translation was not a normal edition but a novelization [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (shosetsu-ka) based on Draycot M. Dell's edition, IBSEN'S 'GHOSTS' Adapted as a Story (1920).

The next essay in the collection, "The Case of False Accusation against Lin's Spenser" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku Supensa enzai jiken"), examines a rather unknown work, Lin Shu's translation of Edmund Spenser's (1552/3-1599) The Faerie Queene (1590-1596). Criticism has been relatively measured, limited to a few authors (Han Guang 1935, 83), and therefore it has received particularly little attention when compared with Shakespeare or Ibsen. Critics state that Spenser's epic poem was translated by Lin Shu into prose, not respecting the original verse form. Tarumoto shows once more that the original source employed in the Chinese translation was a "school edition" published in 1905 by MacMillan, a novelization of the original work, and that Lin Shu explains in the prologue he translated from the MacMillan edition. (18)

The book continues with a remarkable essay on Lin Shu's translation of Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote (1605), which was considered by Zhou Zuoren among others to be a great disappointment [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (shiwang ye jiushi geng shen) for Chinese literature due to its significant abridgements (Zhong Mi 1922, 2a). This opinion still prevails among mainland scholars, despite the fact that it was already suspected by Tai-Loi Ma [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1981) that Lin Shu's translation followed the adapted edition of Peter Motteux (1700-1703) (95), (19) which has been deemed as very deficient and poor in quality and contents. Trough meticulous analysis of Don Quixote's English translations, Tarumoto shows the similarities and possible filiation between Motteux edition and the Chinese translation, thus vindicating once more Lin Shu's faithfulness to the original work he employed. The study concludes with three essays dissecting the origins of Zheng Zhenduo's and Lu Xun's critiques and some final words on their influence on later scholarship.

One year after the publication of Cases of False Accusation against Lin Shu, Tarumoto collected eleven additional essays in a new book, Research Essays on Lin Shu, which covers a wider range of topics, from the aforementioned cases of false accusation to Lin Shu's economic situation. The first essay, "The case of the false accusation of Lin Shu by A Ying: Concerning the Prologue to Familiar Stories Recited from Afar" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("A Ei ni yoru Rin Jo enzai jiken--Ginhen Engo jo wo megutte") revisits the same issue raised in his previous book: Lin Shu's infamous translation of Shakespeare's plays. In this occasion, he author analyzes both the commercial advertisements of the translation and its prologue, showing how Lin Shu, in fact, made a distinction between Shakespeare's shi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (poems), read aloud in theatres, and his own version, which he calls biji [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (short sketches) or jishi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (records). Furthermore, although former scholars were ignorant of Lamb's Tales and may have overlooked what was said in the prologue to this work, the same cannot be said about A Ying, who records Lamb's version in his index while blindly accepting the inherited criticism against Lin Shu's translation methodology.

The next three essays deal with different aspects of Lin Shu's Shakespeare, and are presented, in some way, as an extension of the former. "Lin's Translation of Hamlet: from Familiar Stories Recited from Afar" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku 'Hamuretto': Ginhen Engo kara") compares different passages of Lin Shu's translation with the original, concluding that, despite some minor faults and abridgement, Lin Shu's text is rather faithful to the original. For example, the terms "apparition," "ghost," and "spirit" are consistently translated as ling [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], shen [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and gui [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Tarumoto also briefly criticizes of Zhou Zuoren, who slandered Lin's translations, by showing how his version of Shakespeare's "The History of Ali Baba" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Xia nu nu, 1905) is tarnished by many faults, among them, a change in the plot of the original story. This research into comparative literature continues in the third chapter, "The First Chinese Translation of Lamb's Tales of Shakespeare and Lin's Translation, Focusing on 'Twelfth Night'" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "Ramu ban Sheikusupia monogatari saisho no kanyaku to Rin yaku: 'Jyuni ya' wo chushin ni"). Here Tarumoto offers a comparison between the anonymous translation of Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night" (collected in [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Xie wai qi tan [1903], wrongly misprinted by A Ying as [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Haiwai qitan) and Lin Shu's version, Marriage in Deceit [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Hungui), showing that none of them represents a literal translation: although both being in classical Chinese. Whereas the former often paraphrases the original adding unnecessary text to it, the later frequently abridges the original. Tarumoto's main point here is that Lin Shu's translation methodology was not different from common practice in China. This is attested once more in his fourth essay, "Lin's Translations of 'Shakespeare': Quiller-Couch's 'Julius Caesar'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku Sheikusupia: Kuira Kuchi ban 'Jyuriasu Shiza'"), where, from a comparison between Lin's translation and Arthur Tomas Quiller-Couch's Historical Tales from Shakespeare (1899), the author not only redeems Lin Shu, but establishes that at least two-thirds of his translation relied on the original play rather than Quiller-Couch's edition.

The fifth and sixth essays are two brief insights of comparative literature: "Lin's Translation of Chaucer" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku Chosa") studies Lin Shu's translation of Charles Cowden Clarke's Tales from Chaucer, while "Lin's translation of Hugo" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Rin yaku Yugo") deals with Zheng Zhenduo's influential criticism of A Record of the Righteous Deaths of Two Heroes [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shuangxiong yisi lu, 1921), Lin Shu's rendering of Victor Hugo's Quatrevingt-treize (1874). With meticulous philological scrutiny, Tarumoto shows how wrong Lin Shu's defamers were, for the original book he used was, once more, not a common English translation but an abridged edition for school reading. Lin Shu's translation, though not ad pedem litterae, was faithful to the original employed.

The seventh essay is the longest piece in this volume and also one of the most relevant for the modern reader of Lin Shu. Under the title "The place of Lin Shu in modern Chinese literature history" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Chugoku gendai bungakushi ni okeru Rin Jo no ichi"), the author not only offers a critical review of mainland's scholarly literature on Lin Shu from the May Fourth Movement until 2008, but also surveys most recent studies from Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, and Western countries. He concludes that, although Western scholarship has been slightly generous with Lin Shu's translations, East Asian studies relied mainly on secondary literature from the mainland and, thus, inherited its methodological problems already exposed in his other essays, repeating the so-called "cases of false accusation." This dependence and lack of accuracy can be seen, for example, in the way Lin Shu's article "Discussing the Inadequacy of Eliminating the Classical Language" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Lun guwen zhi bu yi fei") is quoted by secondary literature as "Lun guwen zhi bu dang fei" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], following Hu Shi's error in his reply to this short piece, or the constant references to his political connections with the Anhui clique [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (wanxi junfa) following the publication of his story "Mr. Jing" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Jing sheng"). This essay ends with an introduction to the polemic between Zhang Houzai [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Lin Shu's former student, and Beijing University, to be followed in the ninth contribution.

After a short parentheses reexamining Lin Shu's economy and the myth of his reduction to poverty in his last years, which is covered in the eighth essay, the author continues with a long, well-documented analysis of the controversy over rumors stemming from Zhang Houzai about the dismissal of Chen Duxiu, Qian Xuantong and Hu Shi. "Chen Duxiu's Dismissal of Beijing University: An Appendix to A Chronicle of Cases of False Accusation against Lin Shu'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Chin Dokushu no Pekin Daigaku himen: 'Rin Jo enzai jikenbo' hoi") covers not only Chinese testimonies of the polemic, but also Japanese reports in contemporary newspapers, offering a new image on how Zhang's rumors were used by his opponents to attack Lin Shu on political grounds. This leads to the second part of the essay, where Tarumoto shows how these rumors became true when Chen Duxiu's regular visits to prostitutes earned him a bad name which forces Cai Yuanpei [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] to expel him. The author also recalls the testimony of Zhou Zuoren and Hu Shi regarding an incident between Chen Duxiu, a student and a prostitute, where the later was injured and had to receive hospitalization. According to Tarumoto, when Lin Shu uses the sentence "rickshaw pullers from Luoma City" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Luoma shi yin dongyangche zhi ren) in his short story "Nightmare" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Yaomeng"), he is sarcastically recalling this incident, because Luoma City was a famous street in Beijing with a hospital for prostitutes who were usually taken there by the local rickshaw pullers.

The tenth essay of this compilation is probably the least important for non-Japanese scholars, as it involves two works that were wrongly associated with Lin Shu by Matsueda Shigeo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1905-1995), following his translation of Zhou Zuoren's "About Lu Xun, 2" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Guanyu Lu Xun zhi er"). In this work, Zhou Zuoren refers to two unidentified translations, The White Cloud Pagoda [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Baiyun ta) and A Record of the Fairy Maiden [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Xiannu lu)--the second one is lost--both signed by "Cold Blood" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Lengxue"). Matsueda thought this was Lin Shu, who once wrote under the pen name Mr. Cold Red [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Leng Hong Sheng), but it was, in fact, the pseudonym of Chen Jinghan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], a journalist and translator from Songjiang [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Zhejiang [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. The last essay, "Until There Is 'A Chronicle of Cases of False Accusation against Lin Shu': or, about Ideas and Research Methodology" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("'Rin Jo enzai jiken bo' ga dekiru made: Aruiwa hasso to kenkyu hoho ni tsuite") retakes the main findings presented in this study and describes the methodology employed in his research. It is, so to speak, a plea for academic excellence, expertise in the manipulation of texts, and refusal to appeal ab auctoritate to secondary sources.

Finally, we shall examine Yoshikawa Eiichi's [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2000) brief paper "Lin Shu and the 'Literary Revolution'" (73-93). Apart from dealing with the usual aspects of the controversy between Lin and the advocates of vernacularization, Yoshikawa also analyzes the relation between Beijing University chancellor Cai Yuanpei and Lin Shu and some issues related to his two novelettes, "Mr. Jing" and "Nightmare," which mocked Chen Duxiu, Hu Shi and also Cai Yuanpei. Yoshikawa's insightful approach shows how Cai's unfair criticism against Lin could have been motivated by a couple of references to his persona: The first mention would be his depiction of Cai Yuanpei in "Nightmare," where he is called "Great turtle" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Yuanxu), a pun with his surname Cai which also has this meaning. The second one can be found in Lin Shu's (1919) letter to the chancellor of Beijing University, in which he speaks of "those who pull carts selling [soya] milk" (6), an allusion that Lu Xun (1981) believed was meant to slander Cai (179), whose father was a soya milk seller. However, I find this possibility to be unlikely, because Lin Shu's letter was meant to be an apology for the publication of "Nightmare," in which he had called Cai "Great turtle." (20)

Liu Tieyun

Liu E [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], courtesy name Tieyun, was a businessman, writer, and archaeologist, who also dedicated himself to poetry, music, and medicine. He is the author of the autobiographical The Travels of Lao Can [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (21) a social satire where he reflected his disillusionment with government and advocated private entrepreneurship through the figure of Lao Can, a private investigator modeled after the British detective stories of Sherlock Holmes (Wang 1997, 152).

Following the shift in Japanese scholarship in the 1970s and the study of authors outside of the May Fourth Movement circle, Liu's fame attracted considerable attention from Japanese scholars, with two works collecting individual contributions and one index that has become essential for researchers (Tarumoto 1983; 1990; 1992). Interest has increased over the past decade, with studies offering a dynamic approach to editorship, textual, and historical studies.

Editorship research has been conducted by Sawamoto Kyoko and Tarumoto Teruo, who have traced back the original publication of Lao Can and the complexities of its composition and reeditions in various articles. Liu's novel started to be serialized in the bimonthly Illustrated Fiction [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Xiuxiang xiaoshuo) in 1903 and was interrupted by the author in the thirteenth issue (fourteenth in the original draft of Liu) after the editor, Li Boyuan, removed the eleventh chapter and made minor changes in the text. Liu finished the manuscript of the "first part" of the novel in 1905 and reissued the whole set, including the censored chapter, in the Tianjin Daily News [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Tianjin riri xinwen) in 1906. The author left a "third part" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (waibian) in sixteen pages (one missing), which was published posthumously in 1929 (Wei 1962, 91). All these textual problems are familiar to English-language scholars and there is not an unanimous answer to some of the difficulties presented by the work of Liu Tieyun (Wong 1983; Huang 2004). In order to shed light to these issues, Sawamoto shows the textual differences and tries to establish the textual supremacy of the Mengjin shushe [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] edition for the first part, the materials issued in Tianjin daily for the second, and the original draft for the posthumous text, published one year later in Tarumoto's Materials on Lao Can youji [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Rozan yuki shiryo).

A second problem surrounding the publication of the Lao Can is the censorship of its Chapter 11 and the subsequent "misappropriation" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (toyo) of some of its parts in Li Boyuan's Short History of Civilization [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Wenming xiaoshi). This issue was addressed in two papers and is available to Chinese readers in a translation from the Society (Tarumoto 2006b, 42-63, 102-3). According to Tarumoto, who accurately compared the texts of Liu's Chapter 11 (in manuscript) to Li's Short History, Li should have been half responsible for the plagiarism, because Liu's text was published inside Chapter 59 of Li's History after his death. The editors of the Illustrated Fiction, the ones responsible for the censorship, wrote under the pseudonym of Nanting tingchang [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. This was indeed Li, but after his dead the pseudonym was still used by Ouyang Juyuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], assistant editor in the Illustrated Fiction, who was ultimately responsible for the misappropriation.

Finally, two historical essays have been republished in Collected Studies on Late Qing Fiction (2003). The first one, "Liu Tieyun's Lao Can youji and the Yellow River" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Ryu Tetsuun 'Rozan yuki' to koga"), examines Liu's flood control of the Yellow River and its relation with Lao Can. According to the author, the source for the reforms proposed by Liu was actually his father's work My Humble Opinion on River Flood Prevention [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Hefang chuyi). Tracing back the contents of commonly employed sources, Tarumoto shows that the origin of many misconceptions about the relationship between Lao Can and the restoration works in the Yellow River is the result of taking quoted materials at face value. The case of Lao Can is an interesting example because, as the author shows, Liu's experiences in irrigation were in fact collected in his Seven Discourses on River Control [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Zhihe qi shuo) and only a small section of the Lao Can reflects his involvement in flood control.

The second essay, "Liu Tieyun was wrongly charged" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ("Ryu Tetsuun wa enzai de aru"), is authored by Sawamoto Kyoko and covers the story of Liu's arrest in 1908 and his exile to Urumqi. Mainland and English-language scholarships have usually relied on the authority of Luo Zhenyu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Hu Shi, who believed his arrest was motivated by his exploitation of mines in Shanxi in 1898 and the distribution of Russian grain to the poorest citizens of Beijing in 1900 (Zhu 2015, 352). More recently, Wang Shuzi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2000) has tried to prove a third accusation that Liu was found guilty of salt smuggling in Liaoning in 1907 and was arrested as a traitor (209-37). Sawamoto harshly criticizes Wang's arguments because he "twistedly quotes the original text to use it for his own convenience" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the same grounds, Sawamoto raises additional doubts on the validity of the quotations provided by Wu Zhenqing [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in another paper, where he tries to present Wang Shuzi's argument as his own. Wu Zhenqing's thesis is that Liu "ganged up" [sic] with the Japanese to establish a commercial firm to smuggle salt to Korea. However, as Sawamoto shows, the documentation provided has been selectively quoted in order to support the argument. When confronted with the original, the name of Liu does not appear in relation to any case of salt smuggling. Sawamoto concludes that there are no grounds to sustain the accusation of treachery [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (hanjian) against Liu.

Li Boyuan

Li Boyuan has received considerable attention because of his misappropriation of Liu's Lao Can. Research has also been focused in the editions of his Eyewitness Reports and Exposure of Officialdom [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Guanchang xianxing ji). Most of them have been republished in Collected Studies on Late Qing Fiction (2003).

Research on the editions of the Eyewitness has been conducted exclusively by Tarumoto Teruo, who has tried to recover from ostracism a so-called "bootleg" edition [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (kaizokuban) and other ignored copies belonging to the "revised and annotated editions stemma" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (zochuhonkei). In his seminal article, Tarumoto analyzes two different yet closely related issues: the date of publication of this work in World Vanity Fair [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shijie fanhua bao) and the lawsuit against the "bootleg" edition. As it is well-known, the date of publication of Eyewitness is not clear because there is no complete copy of the journal. Tarumoto examines the contents of a microfilm copy from Shanghai Library, tentatively dated between 1903 and the six months of Guangxu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 31 (1905). From this, he concludes that the serialized edition and its publication in book form were done simultaneously. Secondly, he discusses the lithographed edition of Ouyang Juyuan, whose first half (Volume 1 to 36) was published by the Uphold Roots House [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Chongben tang), while its second part (Volume 37-60) was lithographed by the Cantonese Book Co. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Yuedong shuju). Li fled a lawsuit against the Japanese company Chishinsha [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] for reprinting in 1904 an illustrated edition of his work (the "bootleg" edition, which was in fact published by the Chinese businessman Xi Cuifu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] under the pseudonym [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "Japanese Yoshida Taro") (Wang 2004, 234; Tarumoto 2008a, 1-19). It is possible, the author thinks, that the rights remained with Li's publishing house but, after 1906, following the lawsuit on late 1905, they were acquired by the Cantonese Book Co. and later, in 1909, passed to the Uphold Roots House.

Two more articles deal with Ouyang's edition, found by Tarumoto in Kyoto in late 1981, a typographic printed edition which seems to have been the model for the curious Uphold Roots-Cantonese edition (Tarumoto 2002a; 2002b). Although its year of publication is unknown, it preserves a note by Ouyang from the publishing house of Li Boyuan and, thus, it is plausible that it carried the recognition of its original author, who would have acknowledged its publication. If so, then both the original and the annotated and revised versions should have equal value for future research.

Thematic Studies

Japanese scholars have also covered a broad number of topics, including but not limited to Sino-Japanese editorship, Chinese translations of The Arabian Nights, detective fiction, and Japanese political fiction and its relation with the formation of late Qing fiction.

In 2000, the Society for Late Qing Fiction Research published Research on the Early The Commercial Press [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shoki Shomu Inshokan kenkyu), expanded six years later into Collected Essays on The Commercial Press [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shomu inshokan kenkyu ronshu). They covered the commercial and literary relations of the Sino-Japanese joint venture between Te Commercial Press and the Japanese publishing house Kinkodo, the fire that affected the former during the Shanghai War of 1932, the financial records of the company, and the establishment of the "Collection of fiction" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shuo bu congshu) where most of Lin Shu's works were published.

Also within the Society, the study of Chinese translations of The Arabian Nights has resulted in the publication of the volume Collected Essays on the Chinese Translations of The Arabian Nights [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Kan'yaku Arabian Naito ronshu) (Tarumoto 2006a). This classical collection of stories was translated in 1900 by Zhou Guisheng [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1873-1936). Although these translations were renowned, the originals employed were unknown and research on the Chinese Arabian Nights was limited. This changed after Tarumoto started publishing his results in 2002 in the pages of the journal Late Qing Fiction Communication (Issues 65-82), identifying the original English texts of the different editions. Te aforesaid collection of essays is the result of this research.

Translations of detective stories caused an important impression at the end of the nineteenth century through novel ideas of science and reason (Hung 1998, 118-19). Despite early enthusiasm, detective novels were neglected in post-1949 Chinese studies because of government policies against "bourgeois literature," perceived as harmful and forming a reactionary countercurrent (Tarumoto 2006a, 7). Pioneering work was published in the 1970s by Nakamura Tadayuki, mentor of Tarumoto Teruo, in the form of three articles under the general title "History of Late Qing Detective Fiction" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Shinmatsu tantei shosetsushi ko). (22) Further research by Hirayama Yuichi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (b. 1963) and Tarumoto (2006a) has focused on the translations of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, now in Collected Essays on the Chinese Translations of Holmes, which includes fifteen essays and an index of Chinese translations of Doyle; a detailed comparison between the Japanese and Chinese translations of different stories; and an examination and analysis of six different collections of Doyle's stories.

Finally, reformist ideas in late Qing did not only evolve from Western fiction, but also from Japanese political novels, which had an important impact on the establishment of the "new fiction." Morioka Yuki [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] defends that translators like Liang Qichao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] who favored realism over idealism in their creations, for instance, through his translation of the Japanese political novel Strange Encounters with Beautiful Women [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Kajin no Kigu) by Shiba Shiro [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1853-1922), which was employed by Liang to counteract the traditional view that novels should reflect ideal realities to inspire society. This led to the awareness of the possibilities of fiction for modernization, an important idea incorporated by the devotees of the May Fourth Movement (Morioka 2007; 2012).

Conclusion

Japanese scholarship on late Qing fiction has undergone rapid changes in the past decades. It started as a vicar of mainland's scholarship, inheriting merits and shortcomings but "giving a cold shoulder to late Qing fiction" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Tarumoto 2006a, 4). A second generation expanded their horizons focusing on 1930s literature, but remained limited by their politically-centered interests. Both generations understood literature as a tool to modernize Japan. Finally, a third generation emerged in the 1970s with a less politically-oriented scholarship. Japanese studies have since contributed to the decentering of the "May Fourth paradigm" by addressing the problem of "credibility" of the source materials and the "cases of false accusation" devised during the May Fourth Movement. They opened new ways, addressed neglected authors, and showed that "without late Qing fiction, May Fourth literature could not have been established" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. (23)

Whereas Western scholarship has directed its attention to analytical discussions on modernity, Japanese authors focused on philological issues. Each approach complements the other because analytical research and comparative translation rely on empirical data and cultural contexts: the value of translations within the linguistic framework of "faithfulness to the original" or the subjectivity of the translator are dependent on our knowledge of the original editions employed by the translators, but also on our correct understanding of their ideas within a wider cultural frame beyond the limits established by the May Fourth Movement (Yang 2013, 27-30; Li 2007). Te revitalization of forgotten authors has interpretative implications for the analytical discussions in English language.

This brings us to one of the major shortcomings of Japanese-language studies: because they are restrictively written in Japanese language and, because Japanese scholars rarely engage in international symposiums and conferences--maybe also because of the language barrier--their achievements and amendments remain largely unknown to other specialists. The author truly desires that the information presented in this essay will help readers gain a better understanding of this important research and its contributions.

References

A Ying [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1937. Wan Qing xiaoshuo shi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shanghai [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Shangwu yinshuguan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Calichman, Richard. 2004. Takeuchi Yoshimi: Displacing the West. New York; Cornell University East Asian Program.

Chow, Tse-tsung [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1960. The May 4th Movement. Intellectual Revolution in Modern China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Gamsa, Mark. 2008. The Chinese Translation of Russian Literature: Tree Studies. Leiden: Brill.

Gao, Wanlong. 2009. Recasting Lin Shu. Victoria: Trafford.

--. 2010. "Lin Shu's Choice and Response in Translation from a Cultural Perspective." The Journal of Specialised Translation 13: 26-43.

Guarde-Paz, Cesar. 2015. "A Translator in the Shadows of Early Republican China." Monumenta Serica 63: 172-92.

Haag, Andre. 2011. "Maruyama Masao and Kato Shuichi on Translation and Japanese Modernity." In Translation in Modern Japan, edited by Indra Levy. London: Routledge.

Hagiwara Nobutoshi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1972. "Mitsu no kyodo seimei (Beichu, Nichibei, Nicchu): Hashiri shoteki dansho" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Nihon saiken [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 87.11: 58-64.

Han Guang [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1935. Lin Qinnan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shanghai: Zhonghua shuju [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

Han, Hongju [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2005. Lin yi xiaoshuo yanjiu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

Hill, Michael Gibbs. 2013. Lin Shu, Inc. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hockx, Michel. 2003. Question of Style. Leiden: Brill.

Hoppens, Robert. 2015. The China Problem in Postwar Japan: Japanese National Identity and Sino-Japanese Relations. London: Bloomsbury.

Hu Shi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1918. "Jianshe de wenxue geming lun" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Xin qingnian [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 4.4: 289-306.

Huang, Martin W. 2004. "From Self-Vindication to Self-Celebration. The Autobiographical journey in Lao Can Youji and Its Sequel." In Snakes' Legs: Sequels, Continuations, Rewritings, and Chinese Fiction, edited by Timothy C. Wong, 237-62. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Hung, Eva [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1998. "Giving Texts a Context: Chinese Translations of Classical English Detective Stories 1896-1916." In Translation and Creation, edited by David E. Pollard, 151-76. Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Li, Lu. 2007. "Translation and Nation: Negotiating 'China' in the Translations of Lin Shu, Yan Fu, and Liang Qichao." PhD diss., University of Massachusetts.

Lin Shu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1917. "Lun guwen zhi bu yi fei" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Dagong bao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1 February.

--. 1919. "Zhi Cai Heqing shu" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Gongyan bao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 18 March. 6.

Lu Xun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1981. "Chi Yamagami Masayoshi" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In Lu Xun quanji [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], vol. 14. Beijing [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Renmin wenxue chubanse [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

Iida, Yumiko. 2002. Rethinking Identity in Modern Japan: Nationalism as Aesthetics. London/New York: Routledge.

Ip, Hung-yok, Hon Tze-ki and Lee Chiu-chun. 2003. "The Plurality of Chinese Modernity. A Review of Recent Scholarship on the May Fourth Movement." Modern China 29.4: 490-509.

Ma, Tai-loi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1981. "Lin Shu fanyi zuopin quanmu" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In Lin Shu de fanyi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], by Qian Zhongshu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 60-103. Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan.

Morioka, Yuki [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2007. "Nihon seiji shosetsu no hon'yaku to Shinmatsu shosetsu keishiki ni kansuru kosatsu" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Ritsumeikan keizaigaku [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 56.3: 425-53.

--. 2012. Chugoku kindai shosetsu no seiritsu to shajitsu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Kyoto: Kyoto Daigaku Gakujutsu Shuppankai.

Sato, Tamotsu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1987. Japanese Studies on Chinese Literature: 1973-1983, translated by John T. Wixted. Tokyo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Toyo Bunko.

Sawamoto, Kyoko [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2003. "'Rozan yuki' no teihon kara kaisoroku made 3 ti" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Shinmatsu shosetsu 26: 143-62.

Shadick, Harold. 1990. Introduction to The Travels of Lao Ts'an [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], by Liu T'ieh-yun [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], xxi-xxxiv. New York: Columbia University Press.

Shirado, Norio [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1986. "Salute to the Glorious Tirty Five Years!," Voice of Friendship 16 (1986): 10-11.

Sugawara, Yoshino [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2015. Personal communication at the Faculty of Letters, Kansai University, 28 May.

Sun, Lichuan, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Wang Shunhong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1991. Riben yanjiu Zhongguo xiandangdai wenxue lunzhu suoyin (1919-1989) [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 1919-1989. Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

Takeuchi, Yoshimi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1941. "Hon'yaku jihyo" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Chugoku bungaku [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 70: 645.

--. 1942. "Daitoa senso to warera no ketsui (Sengen)" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Chugoku bungaku 80: 481-84.

--. 2004. What is Modernity? Writings of Takeuchi Yoshimi, translated by Richard F. Calichman. New York: Columbia University Press.

Tarumoto, Teruo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1977. "Henshu noto Editing Notes" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 1: 112.

--, ed. Shinmatsu shosetsu kandan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Kyoto [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Horitsu Bunkasha [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

--. 1990. "Rozan yuki jinmei sakuin" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Osaka keidai ronshu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 193: 101-170.

--. 1992. Shinmatsu shosetsu ronshu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Kyoto: Horitsu Bunkasha.

--. 2001. "'Kanjo genkeiki' no hanpon wo megutte" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shinmatsu shosetsu 24: 45-75.

--. 2002a. "Wasurareta zochuhonkei 'Kanjo genkeiki'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shinmatsu shosetsu kara 65: 1-3.

--. 2002b. "'Zochu Kanjo genkeiki' ni tsuite" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In Zochu Kanjo genkeiki [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 7-18. Otsu: Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyukai.

--. 2003. Tarumoto Teruo chosaku mokuroku 1 (1971-2001) [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 1 (1971-2001). Otsu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyukai [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

--. 2006a. Kan'yaku Homuzu ronshu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Tokyo: Kyuko Shoin.

--. 2006b. Qingmo xiaoshuo yanjiu jigao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Jinan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Qilu shushe [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

--. 2008a. "'Kanjo genkeiki' saiban no shinso" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Shinmatsu shosetsu kara 90: 1-19.

--. 2008b. Rin Jo enzai jikenbo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Otsu: Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyukai.

--. 2009. "Chugoku gendai bungakushi ni okeru Rin Jo no ichi" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In Rin Jo kenkyu ronshu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Otsu: Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyukai.

Uhl, Christian. 2011. "Takeuchi Yoshimi: 'Japan's Asianism,' 1963." In Pan-Asianism: A Documentary History, Volume 2: 1920-Present, edited by Sven Saaler and Christopher W.A. Szpilman. New York: Rowman.

von Kowallis, Jon Eugene. 2006. The Subtle Revolution: Poets of the "Old Schools" during Late Qing and Early Republican China. Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies.

Wang, David Der-wei [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1997. Fin-de-siecle Splendor: Repressed Modernities of Late Qing Fiction, 1848-1911. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Wang, Jingxuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Liu Bannong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Qian Xuantong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). 1918. "Wenxue geming zhi fanxiang" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Xin qingnian 4.3: 268-85.

Wang, Juan. 2004. "The Weight of Frivolous Matters." PhD diss., Stanford University.

Wang, Shuzi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2000. "Jindaishi shang yi da yi yu" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Ming Qing xiaoshuo yanjiu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 4: 209-37.

Wei, Shaochang [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Lao Can youji ziliao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.

Wong, Yoon Wah [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1988. Essays on Chinese Literature. Singapore: Singapore University Press.

Wong, Timothy C. 1983. "Notes on the Textual History of the Lao Ts'an yu-chi." T'oung Pao 69: 23-32.

Wu, Shengqing [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2013. Modern Archaics: Continuity and Innovation in the Chinese Lyric Tradition, 1900-1937. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wu, Zhenqing [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2001. "Liu E zhi huo yuanyin kaobian" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Nankai xuebao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 1: 91-96.

Xiong, Wenli [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2010. "Chugoku bungaku kenkyukai ni totte no 'hon'yaku'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Asahi daigaku ippan kyoiku kiyo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 36: 15-27.

Yang, Lihua. "Translator's Subjectivity in Lin Shu's Translation." Cross-Cultural Communication 9.2: 27-30.

Yoshikawa, Eiichi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2000. "Rin Jo to 'bungaku kakumei'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Bungakubu ronso [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 67: 73-93.

Zhang, Quanzhi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1997. Tuwei yu biange [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Xi'an [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: Xibei daxue chubanshe [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

Zheng, Zhenduo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 1924. "Lin Qinnan xiansheng" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Xiaoshuo yuebao [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] 15.11: 12-23.

Zhong Mi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Zhou Zuoren [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). 1922. "Ziji de yuandi. Shiba 'Moxia zhuan'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Chenbao fujuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 4 September.

Zhu, Lin [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. 2013. "Kindai Nippon chishikijin ni totte no 'Shinago' no tajuteki imi" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Paper presented at the 2nd Symposium of the Next Generation of the Sinological Society of Japan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Nippon Chugoku gakkai dai nikai jisedai shinpojiumu), Akika, Japan, 14 October. Accessed 6 July 2017 http://nippon-chugoku-gakkai.org/utf8/jisedai/02/shurin.pdf

Zhu, Weizheng. 2015. Rereading Modern Chinese History. Leiden: Brill.

Cesar Guarde-Paz

Department of Theoretical and Practical Philosophy University of Barcelona

(1) For the polemic between the classical and the vernacular, see Michael Gibbs Hill (2013, 219-21).

(2) For a review of these deficiencies see Cesar Guarde-Paz (2015, 183-86).

(3) For instance, criticism of Lin Shu's "use of classical Chinese and his being more than cavalier with the original texts" is accepted at face value in Mark Gamsa (2008, 21), as it is also in Gao Wanlong (2009; 2010). On occasion, scholars have gone as far as to misrepresent evidence, as it is the case with two studies by Wang Shuzi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2000) and Wu Zhenqing [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2001) we shall address promptly.

(4) For a review of Japanese scholarship on classical Chinese literature see Sato Tamotsu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1987).

(5) Hung-yok Ip and his co-authors' (2003) review on scholarship of the May Fourth Movement ignores Japanese scholarship (490-509). In China there have been attempts to introduce Japanese scholarship, such as Tarumoto Teruo [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2006b). Also, collaboration between Chinese scholars and the Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyu [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] journal has increased over the past decade, but relations have been circumstantial due to the language barrier and, probably, to the growth of nationalism in recent years, which has led some scholars to affirm that "translated literature is not Chinese literature" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Tarumoto 2006a, 4). For instance, no Japanese scholar was invited to the Lin Shu Research International Symposium [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in Fuzhou [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], October, 2014, although many participants had collaborated in Japanese publications before.

(6) A similar division is suggested in Sato (1987) which emphasizes the difference between pre- and post-1949 research (1, 7-8).

(7) For a complete history of this society, see Xiong Wenli [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2010) and Zhu Lin [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2013).

(8) For an index, see Sun Lichuan [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and Wang Shunhong [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1991).

(9) See also Sato (1987, 7-8).

(10) I follow Chow Tse-tsung's [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1960) characterization of the May Fourth Movement in its "broader sense" covering a "the period roughly from 1917 through 1921" when "traditional Chinese ethics, customs, literature, history, religion, and social and political institutions were fiercely attacked" (1).

(11) See also Tarumoto Teruo (2006b): "I do not have the slightest interest in the practice of writing papers by selecting information according to a pre-designed conclusion based on a given 'ideology'" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (239).

(12) For the academic interest and cultural exchange in these years, see Hagiwara Nobutoshi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1972) and Shirado Norio [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1986).

(13) This index can be downloaded at the website of the society, http://shinmatsu.main.jp.

(14) For a bibliography see Tarumoto Teruo (2003).

(15) I owe this reference to an anonymous reviewer.

(16) I use the expression "comparative translation studies" in the sense in which it is used in Japanese academia--comparative analysis of the source and the translated text, rather than the theoretical approaches of comparative literature.

(17) For which see, in English, Hill (2013, 192-230).

(18) This was also suspected by Tai-loi Ma [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1981, 74).

(19) For criticisms in Mainland, see Zhang Quanzhi [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1997, 92); Han Hongju [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2005, 126-27).

(20) "Turtle" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (wugui) referred to a man who visited prostitutes. Lin Shu was making fun of the fact that Beijing University was called "Brothel" [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (tanyan tuan) and Cai Yuanpei, its chancellor, could be its "Great turtle."

(21) For an introduction see Harold Shadick (1990).

(22) They were published in the Shinmatsu shosetsu 2-4 (1978-1980).

(23) See the advertisement of Shinmatsu shosetsu kandan in the back cover of Shinmatsu shosetsu kenkyu, December, 1983 (Chinese edition, standalone issue).
COPYRIGHT 2017 The Centre for Humanities Research, Lingnan University
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Guarde-Paz, Cesar
Publication:Journal of Modern Literature in Chinese
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:9CHIN
Date:Jun 22, 2017
Words:10274
Previous Article:The migrant voice: The politics of writing home between the Sinophone and Anglophone worlds.
Next Article:The translated identities of Chinese minority writers: Sinophone Naxi authors.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters