Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Literary Studies in China

ISSN 1673-7318

ISSN 1673-7423(Online)

CN 11-5745/I

Postal Subscription Code 80-982

Front. Lit. Stud. China    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (3) : 408-429    https://doi.org/10.3868/s010-005-016-0025-2
Orginal Article
A Study on the Basic Theory of Lu Xun’s Literary Translation: “Everything Is an Intermediate Object”
WU Jun()
School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Shandong University, Ji’nan 250100, China
 Download: PDF(326 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Although among the modern Chinese intellectuals endeavoring for the enlightenment of the people, Lu Xun is the most rebellious and resolute, his rebelliousness against tradition does not mean that he has nothing to do with tradition itself. On the contrary, in order to fight against a tradition, as a precondition he must have a deep understanding and cognition toward that tradition. The emergence of Lu Xun’s philosophical proposition, “everything is an intermediate object” (yiqie doushi zhongjianwu ), occurs exactly in this way. With the evocation of this philosophical thought, the “intermediate object” (zhongjianwu ), we see the inseparable indigenous tie predestined between Lu Xun and Chinese traditional culture, even while he fiercely fights it. Lu Xun’s innovative idea was produced in the process of deducing and developing the excellent and discarding the worthless in Chinese traditional culture, while absorbing and learning from the advanced thought of the West. Furthermore, his philosophy of the “intermediate object” forms the basis of his study and practice in translation. His purpose in translation is to bravely step out of the circle of inherent traditional culture, to come to the advanced “middle zone” where Chinese and Western cultures collide, and to probe into the new cultural factors from the West. In doing so he seeks to reform and improve Chinese traditional culture, and thus meet “the third era which China has never experienced before.” However, Lu Xun’s idea of “intermediate objects” is neither the traditional idea of the “golden mean” (zhongyong zhidao ) nor that of “hypocrisy” (xiangyuan 乡愿). Unfortunately they are often mixed together into chaos by many people. So it is necessary to have further discussion about these terms and distinguish them separately.

Keywords Lu Xun      intermediate object      Chinese culture      bridge of translation      realistic significance     
Issue Date: 21 October 2016
 Cite this article:   
WU Jun. A Study on the Basic Theory of Lu Xun’s Literary Translation: “Everything Is an Intermediate Object”[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2016, 10(3): 408-429.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/flsc/EN/10.3868/s010-005-016-0025-2
https://academic.hep.com.cn/flsc/EN/Y2016/V10/I3/408
[1] JI Jianqing. In Search of “Voices”: Linguistic Choice and Construction of Subjectivity in Lu Xun’s Early Translations and Writings[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2020, 14(4): 605-639.
[2] LI Jikai, SUN Xu. On Lu Xun’s “Memes”—Taking the Example of the Tie between Lu Xun and Shaanxi[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2020, 14(1): 134-156.
[3] HONG Seuk-pyo. The Shaping of Lu Xun’s Public Image and His Portrait Images[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2019, 13(4): 584-629.
[4] Satoru Hashimoto. Science, History, Fiction: The Facetious Mediality of Lu Xun’s Old Stories Retold[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2019, 13(3): 385-404.
[5] Jon Eugene von Kowallis. Understanding Wild Grass by Talking to Oneself: Lu Xun’s Yecao through the Lens of Ziyan Ziyu and the Prism of the Past[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2019, 13(2): 171-199.
[6] Jon Eugene von Kowallis. Re-Contextualizing Lu Xun’s Early Thought and Poetics in the Journal Henan [J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2018, 12(3): 388-423.
[7] Jerry D. Schmidt. Li Ruqian, the Lu Xun of the Nineteenth Century[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2018, 12(2): 217-253.
[8] G. Andrew Stuckey. Female Relations: Voiceless Women in “Liuyi jie” and “Zhufu”[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2017, 11(3): 488-509.
[9] Qin WANG. How Not to Have Nostalgia for the Future: A Reading of Lu Xun’s “Hometown”[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2016, 10(3): 461-473.
[10] Clint Capehart. The Animal Kingdom in the Legacy of Modern Chinese Literature: Lu Xun’s Writings on Animals and Bio-Politics in the Republican Era[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2016, 10(3): 430-460.
[11] Chiu-yee Cheung. Who Invited Lu Xun to Hong Kong?: An Examination of Two Accounts and Some New Materials[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2016, 10(3): 392-407.
[12] Jon Eugene von Kowallis. Collisions of the Past with the Present: Translation, Texts, and History[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2015, 9(4): 581-615.
[13] Shakhar Rahav. Blade of Remembrance: Memory, Objects, and Redemption in Lu Xun[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2015, 9(3): 453-477.
[14] Marián GáLIK. Archer Hou Yi According to Julius Zeyer (1841–1901) and Lu Xun (1881–1936): Changing Perceptions of Ancient Myths in Modern Literature[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2014, 8(3): 359-373.
[15] Xudong ZHANG. “The Becoming Self-Conscious of Zawen”: Literary Modernity and Politics of Language in Lu Xun’s Essay Production during His Transitional Period[J]. Front. Lit. Stud. China, 2014, 8(3): 374-409.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed