Chen Pingyuan: The mission, dilemma and way out of the Department of Chinese

Humanities scholars like to think independently and express themselves freely, but in fact they are largely constrained by the general environment—politics, economics, science and technology, education, etc. If you encounter a big fortune, you can't do anything about it, you can only observe and think at the same time, and constantly adjust yourself. I don't believe that there is a famous scholar or thinker who has single-handedly "turned the tide", and if the luck is really bad, it is good to be able to do it alone.

Whether it's recalling or imagining, there's a question of time scale. Too "ancient" or infinitely "distant" is not the best entry point for discussion. I prefer to discuss the "past" and the "future" from a perspective that can be examined, perceived, and grasped. If this is the case, 30 years may be a more appropriate measure – that is, the time of a generation performing on the stage of history.

Now, from the perspective of "30 years in Hedong", I will talk about the long-term concerns and near-term worries of the Department of Chinese—involving international politics, scientific and technological progress, college culture, and specific research strategies.

1. Big times and small disciplines

Eleven years ago, I published "Thirty Years of Hedong in Humanities" in Reading Magazine, which mainly discussed five topics: first, humanities that are becoming increasingly lonely and unwilling to be lonely; second, the rise and fall of government and private learning; third, why humanities "hurt the most"; fourth, whether the "Great Leap Forward" can be rejected; Fifth, the feelings and aspirations of a generation. The conclusion is: "A generation has a generation's predicament, and a generation has a generation's way of living, probably because of reading modern literature, I believe that the road ahead is boundless, both graves and flowers." ”

At a turning point again, I had to "look ahead" and then "look back". In the last two or three years, I have repeatedly looked back at the era of globalization and its crises in my speeches. Since the 90s of the 20th century, "globalization" has become a mainstream ideology, profoundly affecting human society and its daily life. From the collapse of the Soviet Union, which marked the end of the Cold War, to China's formal accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) at the end of 2001, marking a new stage of China's industrial (and even cultural) opening up, to the intensification of the confrontation between China and the United States in 2020, superimposed by the three-year epidemic, the road to globalization has become treacherous. This not-so-distant "megatrend" restricts the teaching and research of our Chinese Department all the time.

Engaging in academic history and examining the footsteps of our predecessors should not only be confined to domestic politics, but also involve the international environment, which is often closely related to the latter. It not only talks about important junctures such as the anti-rightist movement, the "Cultural Revolution", and reform and opening up, but also places it in the context of the Cold War. Ten years ago, when I was teaching at CUHK, I wrote "The Mission and Sentiments of the Department of Chinese: "Literary Education" of Peking University, National Taiwan University, and CUHK in the Fifties and Sixties of the Twentieth Century", which carefully analyzed the confrontation between the two camps and China's unique position, higher education in New China under the background of the Cold War, how "modern Chinese literature" as a discipline rose, and how Chinese departments in different countries/regions were subject to ideological changes. In the past two years, I have also given more than one special lecture entitled "The Construction of Literary History in the Context of the Cold War: Focusing on Wang Yao, Pushike, and Xia Zhiqing", which is a collection of several of my articles, such as the article on Pushike and Xia Zhiqing in "Aspects of Novel Historiography" (Joint Publishing 2021 edition), as well as many articles by me discussing Mr. Wang Yao. Such a selection of topics and ideas, of course, is unique, not only pointing to history, but also related to the present. In the spring semester of 2023, I gave a lecture on "The History of Modern Chinese Literature" at Peking University, and the third lecture was "The Construction of Literary History in the Cold War Period (50s to 70s)", which further expanded the object of discussion and unearthed the unknown reflections behind many scholars/works. The reason why he repeatedly paid tribute to the embarrassing situation and subtle thoughts of Eastern and Western scholars in the context of the Cold War is that he hopes to provide a reference for the younger generation to avoid all kinds of pitfalls that may arise at any time.

In my unprofessional speculation, the world today is not likely to completely revert back to the iron walls of the Cold War era, nor is it very different from the rapid progress of globalization in the past three decades. A few days ago, I wrote a preface to a book by an old student, lamenting that my personal talent and diligence must be matched by the general environment of the times, otherwise it will be difficult to bloom smoothly. "As the international situation becomes turbulent and the vision of a global village gradually fades, no one can say whether the next generation of Chinese scholars will be able to follow the path more smoothly and how international exchanges and cooperation will be carried out."

2. From the pen-changing movement, the digital age to ChatGPT

In the middle and Chinese contexts, the fate of learning, disciplines and scholars was originally mainly considered politics (throughout the twentieth century), but in the nineties it began to focus on the economy, and now it is necessary to add the factor of science and technology. In the past 30 years, the rapid development of science and technology has completely changed the daily life of the people, and it is impossible to avoid this earth-shaking change when talking about the trajectory and approach of the humanities. A very concrete example of this is the popularization of personal computers and the advent of the Internet age.

I started using computers in 1993 and my teacher was Mr. Pang Pu, a famous historian of philosophy. At the age of 65, Mr. Pang had already made a name for himself, but he quickly became addicted to computers. Friends who need to install, debug or use a personal computer, a phone call, he immediately rode a bicycle to the door. That year, Peking University was promoted to a senior title, and in addition to foreign language scores, you also had to test computer knowledge—including IBM's history, the use of the DOS system, and your Chinese input speed. Originally called the "Pen Change Movement", the participants were all in high spirits, and it did indeed bring about a great change in the reading, thinking, and writing of literati and scholars. However, there must be advantages and disadvantages, and the sequelae of the pen change movement is that readers completely stay away from the classical era of brushes and rice paper, and no longer have the habit of preserving or studying manuscripts.

Different from the silent moisturizing of the pen change movement, the advent of the Internet era is more like a storm. In 2000, I wrote "Humanities Research in the Digital Age", and there is a passage in it that still feels thrilling to read today:

The biggest concern is that the "solid process" is replaced by the "virtual result". If you don't want to dive in and play, just a quick browsing, can you still be called a "reader"? How would you feel if one day, the humanities scholar's work process for writing a paper became: one set the subject, two search, three browse, four download, five cut, six paste, seven copy, and eight print? In this eight-step process, the line between Write and Edit becomes blurred. If it really comes to this, it will be a fatal blow to the humanities. Not to mention that the functions of cohesion, tradition, and knowledge are difficult to achieve, but to be mean, even judging the quality of the paper and whether it is plagiarized will become a very difficult problem - who can guarantee that the paper is not downloaded from the Internet and spliced together?

There is no such thing as perfect change, and everyone wants to see the megatrends as early as possible so that they can benefit from the disadvantages and avoid the disadvantages. But in fact, the arrogant wild horse of scientific and technological progress does not depend on human will at all. At the beginning, no one could have predicted that there would be ChatGPT, which is 100 times more magical than online retrieval.

ChatGPT, a natural language processing tool driven by artificial intelligence technology, was released on November 30, 2022, which immediately caused a strong shock from all walks of life around the world, and its shock wave has not stopped or weakened so far. The humanities also felt this huge impact, and friends went online to test it, some disappreciated, some sighed, and more fell into deep thought.

Technological progress and industrial miracles happen every year, but this time is very different, and the reports are terrifying. When it comes to different professions, such as whether teachers and doctors still have value, whether artists will be replaced, and the extent to which artificial intelligence technology affects the research and teaching of the humanities, many discussions are obviously self-soothing. If, as OpenAI researchers estimate, "the most affected professions include interpreters and translators, poets, lyricists, public relations specialists, writers, mathematicians, tax preparers, blockchain engineers, accountants and auditors, and journalists," then there is no doubt that the Chinese department is in a precarious position. If you cross-question ChatGPT: "What impact do you have on the humanities?" As you can guess with your eyes closed, the answer must be a mixed bag. One of the most immediate pitfalls is that the value of the humanities plummets when writing can be done with the help of ChatGPT. Some scholars are optimistic: "Technically, artificial intelligence, represented by ChatGPT, has changed writing, but they cannot imitate the creativity, ethics, and spirituality of the humanities." I believe that the problem is that there are very few people who can engage in original writing in the true sense of the word. In this sense, from the "blurring of the boundaries between writing and editing" that concerns in the Internet age, to ChatGPT's direct generation of all kinds of texts you want, without the need for long-term literary education or academic training, this is an absolute disaster for the humanities.

Of course, if it is not from the perspective of social evaluation, but focuses on personal cultivation and temperament formation, such as the ability to read classics, insight into the subtleties of the world, understanding the suffering of life, and cultivating the nobility of human nature, all of which ChatGPT does not have. At the 2023 "Scholarly Lingnan" National Reading Forum held in Guangzhou, I was asked to talk about "Our Future Reading and Innovation".

"In an era where scientific and technological progress is getting faster and faster, life is becoming more and more convenient, reading for all people is likely to be 'learning for oneself'." Chen Pingyuan believes that the current national reading is different from vocational training, reading is for one's own self-cultivation, for one's own pleasure, and for one's own life enrichment. What will reading look like in thirty years? Chen Pingyuan put forward his own vision: "As long as people continue to read after 30 years, they should read more 'useless books'." Thirty years ago, the textbook for computer exams was a 'useful book', but now it is long gone. But the 'useless books' of literature, history and philosophy that I read thirty years ago have remained deeply in my life. Therefore, the whole people should advocate reading more 'useless books', and read more books that are cross-professional, interdisciplinary and cross-media. ”

But can such an answer be relieved by skeptical readers? I'm not sure. So, I don't dare to say as the optimist says: "The emergence of ChatGPT has further opened our eyes to the irreplaceability of the humanities." ”

3. Chinese departments inside and outside the campus

On second thought, maybe I was overthinking. Because this is not the first time that similar warnings have appeared, we can neither ignore nor believe too much. Five years ago, for example, I heard more exciting and worrying prophecies about technology.

It was January 15, 2017, the first Future Science Prize Award Ceremony was held in Beijing, and scientists boldly predicted: in ten years, artificial intelligence will surpass human thought; Twenty years from now, 80 percent of the world's employed population will not be working; Humanity can achieve immortality in thirty years. My gut feeling is that if all three of these prophecies come true, the world will become more turbulent and the future of humanity will be even more uncertain. Seeing that I was first worried about how these 80% of the idlers/wasters would live, the host said that all of them had changed to literature and art, which was very elegant. Is there such a good thing? What is the point of life if so many people feel that they are completely useless? Also, if medicine can really make some people immortal, then who determines the length of each person's lifespan and how the human metabolism is completed? Without the limit of death, the wisdom and ethics of the entire human race must be reconstructed.

Back to the present, we have to care about the future of mankind and the future of the discipline, the long-term and the near-term. This goes back to the university campus, the Chu River and Han circles and the conflict of interests between various faculties, which is an imminent problem. I have written an article advocating a view of the university from the perspective of "disciplinary culture", with the main point that as an organizational culture, the complexity within the university is likely to exceed our original imagination. Each has its own academic vision, each has its own professional interests, each has its own idolatry, and each has its own self-esteem and self-love. When these disciplines with different interests and development paths come together to form a "university" of knowledge, friction and collision will inevitably occur. The so-called "university management", in a sense, is to carry out effective coordination and integration within the university.

Specific to our long-term study, work, and service of the Chinese Department, in the current China, whether it is strong or weak, I have specifically talked about this topic, causing many colleagues to sigh and sigh (Chen Pingyuan: "The Rise and Fall of Disciplines and the Rise and Fall of Talents-The Contemporary Fate of Literary Education", China Reading News, May 25, 2022). There is a comparison of secular salaries on the outside, and there is the allocation of university funds inside, and the humanities represented by the Department of Chinese are actually in a very bad situation. As an individual scholar, you can completely ignore worldly prejudices, read your own books without distractions, and follow your own path; However, if you consider the development of the discipline and the historical fate of the humanities as a whole, you cannot help but reflect on it. Many years ago, I made an impassioned speech at a symposium, and then wrote "Speak Confidently and Appropriately about the Benefits of the Humanities", which was included in "How Literature Educates: Literary Education from a Humanistic Perspective" (Oriental Publishing House, 2021 edition), and placed it at the beginning of the article to highlight my concern about this topic.

Two years ago, the Department of Chinese at Peking University commemorated the 110th anniversary of the founding of the department, and I had the honor to speak as a representative of the faculty, in which I talked about the fact that the Department of Chinese Language and Literature in each country is an important force in the cultural and spiritual construction of this country, and the influence of the Department of Chinese at Peking University on the public is beyond the reach of many departments. "To a large extent, it's a spillover effect, an influence that transcends professional constraints. Some faculties are powerful, but their influence is limited to their own major. If you look closely at the Department of Chinese, its teachers and students, their range of activities, their speaking postures, and their energy to influence society are beyond the original professional design. "For this reason, when talking about the performance of Chinese departments of prestigious universities, we should not only look at subject rankings, nor even be limited to the history of education or academics, but when appropriate, we must also extend our attention to literary history, cultural history and even intellectual history." This has been the case in the past, and I hope it will be the case in the future. The speech was met with applause, and the president of Peking University also gave a standing ovation. But I know that not every leader or scholar agrees with me, and it's better to just say it openly than to sulk in my heart.

Fourth, four say "three-legged standing"

The title of this article was originally "The Dilemma and Opportunities of the Chinese Department", and finally deleted "opportunities" and highlighted "mission". Why? Because everyone likes to listen to good words, when they occasionally talk about difficulties, they immediately change the conversation, saying that "crisis" is "turning point". In fact, it is very difficult to transform from crisis to vitality, such an opportunity cannot be said to be absent, but it must be the right time and place. Speak and listen to the sound, listen to the gongs and drums, the key words are generally at the end, and the original question is easy to turn to the light in the front, and the results are the mainstay. In fact, the key to finding the way is to understand where the traps are, so as not to fall into big talk.

In recent years, my discourse strategy has been: externally, to speak out loud about the benefits of the humanities; Internally, we constantly self-reflect, practice internal skills, and strive to improve the competitiveness of the Department of Chinese. More than 10 years ago, I wrote "The Dilemma, Charm and Way Out of the Humanities", in which there is this paragraph: "It would be a great sorrow for a humanities scholar to make 'learning' a skilled 'technical work' without personal feelings in it." Therefore, the first thing I want to say is that there are people in learning, who have joys, sorrows, feelings, and moods. The "feelings" and "state of mind" mentioned here include trying to find a way out of the difficult situation for the Chinese department where I have a life. At the operational level, I envision four "three-legged stands" and constantly improve myself in practice.

The first tripod has a long history, at least nearly 100 years old. If we focus on the discipline system, in 1959, Peking University took the lead in setting up a major in ancient literature in the country and handed it over to the Chinese system management, so that the situation of "three-legged support" of Chinese in Peking University was officially formed. However, in fact, since 1925, the professional scope of the Department of Chinese Literature of Peking University has not only included pure "literature", but also "language" and "literature". On this topic, I have a special discussion in "The Vicissitudes of Chinese Education" in 100 Years and "Literary History as a Discipline: Methods, Approaches and Realms of Literary Education". In the discipline catalogue issued by the Ministry of Education of China, these three majors are currently all first-level disciplines of Chinese and Chinese language and literature, and while supporting each other, they are also expanding their horizons and fields, such as linguistics actively applying for the Natural Science Foundation, ancient literature and history alliance, and literature majors expanding to film, drama and other art fields.

The second tripartite refers to classical studies, modern studies, and cross-cultural studies. In different historical periods and in different countries and regions, there are completely different choices on how to allocate resources, make up for shortcomings, and seek the direction of breakthrough. Taking Peking University as an example, the establishment of the Department of Comparative Literature in the 80s, the emphasis on traditional culture studies in the 90s, and the establishment of the Institute of Modern Chinese Humanities in 2022 are all inspired by the changes in the international/domestic situation and the needs of the development of the discipline. In 2021, I wrote a letter to the president of Peking University, mentioning how to gather interdisciplinary forces to carry out comprehensive research on "modern China" from a holistic and long-term perspective, because in the past two decades, Peking University has paid more attention to the academic construction of ancient China studies and cross-cultural studies, relatively ignoring "modern China", and lagging behind in resource allocation and talent training. In my opinion, we should strategically pay equal attention to ancient China, modern China, and cross-cultural studies, and form a stable pattern of "three-legged support", so as to better shoulder the historical responsibility of Peking University.

The third tripartite is about how words, images, and sounds can be combined in research. Ten years ago, I wrote "The Four Perspectives of Modern China Studies: Images · Voices of Universities· Urban ·", in a sense, it is a countermeasure to realize that the changes in the ideological trend of the times and technological means may lead to the transformation of the Chinese system. Continuing previous research, of course, is also possible; However, the introduction of new perspectives and ideas may "have a different taste in my heart". I am a professor of Chinese, and I have no professional training in art history, so talking about "reading pictures" is actually a bit out of bounds. After the publication of the revised edition of "History on the Left and Right and the Spread of Western Studies to the East: A Study of Pictorial in the Late Qing Dynasty" and its great acclaim, I said in my Q&A: "The era of relying only on words to convey knowledge and emotion has passed. We must be aware that words are increasingly being challenged by images as well as sounds. In May 2023, the Commercial Press launched my "Sound China: The Charm and Possibilities of Speech", which focused on how "speech", as one of the "three sharp tools for spreading civilization", was allied with "newspapers" and "schools", which contributed to the transformation of modern Chinese thought, politics, learning, and literature. On September 16, the Institute of Modern Chinese Studies of Peking University hosted the first session of the workshop on "Modern China from a Cross-Media Perspective", which discussed the possibilities of sound research with the title of "Sound China". While maintaining the "decipherment" and "speaking" that teachers and students of the Department of Chinese are good at, we also pay attention to images and sounds, which may expand our thinking and expression. I believe that with the changes of the times, the advancement of technology, the transformation of media, and the improvement of readers/audiences' ability and interest, it is necessary and possible for the teaching and research of the Department of Chinese to expand and upgrade.

Cognition is biased, and perception is crooked.

The fourth three-legged stand is the three-in-one of teaching, scientific research and social practice. The first two are routine actions on university campuses, with clear evaluation criteria and institutional guarantees. As for social practice/service, the Department of Chinese is different from the natural sciences, and very few patents can be transformed; It is also very different from the social sciences and is not known for being a think tank. When we go out of the campus, we have the meaning of contributing our talents to serve the society, but it is also related to the improvement of our own knowledge and cultivation. In other words, the social practice here is not an external addition, but an internal part of our teaching and research. This may be determined by the nature of the humanities, which attaches equal importance to reading, reading people, and reading society. I once changed an old couplet according to my own taste: "Two ears hear things outside the window, and read the books of sages with one heart." The words "no" and "only" were deleted, and all of a sudden the world was wide and the blood was connected. In my opinion, in some majors, such as humanities, the fence of the world should not be tied too tightly, and only by referring to "things outside the window" can we truly understand, read through, and read through the "sage books".

In the current world, whether it is the East or the West, whether it is a Chinese language literature or a foreign language literature, the teaching and research of this Chinese language and literature are facing great challenges, and how to deal with them calmly is worthy of deep thought by all practitioners. In the foreseeable future, the Department of Undergraduate Language and Literature or the Department of Foreign Chinese Language and Literature in Chinese University will not be abolished, but if we stick to the original one-third of an acre of land and cannot "renew every day", the attraction of the younger generation will quickly diminish. This is a potentially huge crisis that we must be aware of. From teaching reform, writing updates to discipline breakthroughs, there are many possibilities, but I just talk about my personal worries and attempts, hoping to attract the attention or echo of the same people.