Abstract
In this book, Xiaoqun Xu explores the complicated interactions between cosmopolitanism and nationalism in Chinese intellectual life by examining the history of journalism in early 20th-century China. It is a thought-provoking addition to the rapidly expanding body of the literature on the history of modern Chinese mass media, cultural globalization, and public discourse on the nature of Chinese nationalism/internationalism. To explain current trends in intellectual discourse among the Chinese media and intelligentsia, the author focuses his research in the turbulent 1920s, which he claims are “essential to understanding Chinese history and culture.”
Xiaoqun Xu is a professor of history at Christopher Newport University in Virginia. He specializes in the history of Chinese modernization and intellectual discourse. In the work under review, Xu addresses three important questions: Which materials were published in The Chenbao Fukan? What was the role played by this newspaper supplement in the growing Chinese print media, in forming and informing “the public” and “public opinion”? And what does all this say about the historical significance of the new cultural era in China?
The six chapters of the monograph discuss various aspects of what the author calls the “New Cultural Era” spanning 1918 to 1928, the post–World War I years that saw consolidation of China as a republic and an emerging modern nation-state (the Chinese Empire was abolished in 1911). The issue of media and cultural globalization in China has of course been quite intensively researched by both Western and Chinese scholars (Doug Guthrie 2006, Huike Wen 2013, etc.). Yet, Xiaoqun Xu believes he can offer a fresh look at the political and cultural discourses through analysis of a single, but very influential media outlet: The Chenbao Fukan, the literary supplement to the Morning Post newspaper published in Beijing. He argues that the importance of The Fukan derives from “the growing role of newspaper supplements in shaping men and women’s reading habits and engaging their political, intellectual and literary interest.” In turn, the emerging new media contributed significantly to influencing public opinion on various issues, such as the rising nationalism and what he terms “cosmopolitanism” and “individualism” throughout the “new cultural era.”
The book conceptualizes the dynamics of political and intellectual history, and specifically the history of Chinese journalism, by utilizing content analysis and case studies of The Chenbao Fukan. The first chapter deals with the background of the cultural debates in China in general and its capital Beijing in particular, and the role of the Chinese media in these debates. In addition, Xu looks at the editorial policy of the newspaper, attempting to explain how and why The Chenbao Fukan became so popular and influential. Chapter 2 assesses the emergence of three important topics in the newspaper: cosmopolitanism, nationalism, and what the author calls “Colonial hierarchy.” To develop his arguments, Xu turns to what he calls The Fukan’s “intellectual-moral paradox—a tension between cosmopolitanism as a cultural longing and nationalism as a political imperative” by spotlighting foreign contributions to The Fukan through selecting three prominent foreign authors who visited China and made a strong impact on agenda-setting by publishing their own works—Bertrand Russell, Vasilij Eroshenko, and Rabindranath Tagore. Chapter 3 analyzes the translation practices and the selection process for foreign works being translated into Chinese as The Fukan’s cosmopolitan character and its content, according to the author “depended to a large degree on translated materials, which was a part of a larger phenomenon in the early twentieth-century.” The translation work made a significant impact on the Chinese audience, introducing certain Western notions and concepts of cultural change, nationalism, and transnational identities. Chapter 4 turns to a very different set of publications—the travelogues and reflections of Chinese students and scholars who went overseas (mainly to Europe, both Eastern and Western) and published their observations and comparisons between the East (China) and the West (the rest of the world) “to construct” or “sometimes to destabilize such notions as ‘the Chinese nation,’ ‘civilization,’ ‘national character.’” They were all written in vernacular Chinese for mass audience “thus being a part of ‘literary revolution’ in that sense.” Chapters 5 and 6 summarize the findings of the research and develop a discussion about the changing nature of intellectual discourse in China, as the Western style media began penetrating many different circles of society, contributing to an emerging culture of media-reading fostering open polemics.
The strength of Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Individualism in Modern China lies in the author’s skillful selection of media documents, providing in-depth analysis, and setting these historical records in a broader cultural and intellectual context by explaining their role in the emergence of Western style media in China.
Unfortunately, the author assumes that readers of this book have a good command of both Chinese history and the history of media. Therefore, he provides a very sketchy description of the historical background and setting of the “new cultural era.” The work could benefit from a concise historical introduction and probably a quick comparative snapshot of developments in the region. This would better situate the complexity of social and political development in China during the 1920s. Overall, though, this research monograph can be considered as a notable contribution to the study of the history of Chinese media and the role of media in shaping modernity and nationalism in 21st-century China.