Journal of Chinese Film Studies Volume 4, Issue 1

《中国电影研究》第四卷第一期

Revivalism in the New Life Movement and Cultural Conservatism in Early Chinese Films, 1934-1937

新生活运动与早期中国电影的‘文化保守主义

1 About the Author

Jiuru Li is an associate professor in the Department of Film Studies at Beijing Film Academy, specializing in the research of early Chinese film history.

李九如，北京电影学院电影学系副教授，主要研究方向为中国早期电影史。

2 Abstract and Key Words

Abstract: During the period of 1934-1937, the cultural atmosphere of revivalism was magnified by the New Life Movement. Within this period, certain films of cultural conservatism were produced. These films, whose modern significance has been overlooked until recently, tended to be treated simply in the traditional narrative of film history.

Key words: New Life Movement; revivalism; conservatism; early Chinese film

摘要：在抗战前新生活运动所放大的复古文化语境中，出现了一些在文化上趋向于保守的电影，它们在以往的电影史叙述中，往往被忽略或简单化对待，而其本身的现代意义则未得到足够重视。

关键词：新生活运动 复古 保守 早期中国电影

3 A GLIMPSE OF THE ARTICLE

The New Life Movement: Feudal or Modern

新生活运动：“封建”还是现代

The New Life Movement in 1934 was a Chinese political movement promoted by the social-control force, and aimed to change the lifestyle of the people by invoking the four principles rooted in Chinese tradition: “courtesy, righteousness, honesty and shame”. In the historical discourse of this movement, focus is given to its “retro” characteristic, especially the so-called restoration of “feudal ethics”. The statement which argues the movement’s “retro” nature cannot be said to be totally unreasonable; however, it ignores the reinterpretation of “courtesy, righteousness, honesty and shame” by the New Life Movement, and even the goal of building a modern country and modernizing the life of citizens, which has been emphasized in the movement. With respect to the purpose of the New Life Movement, it’s pursuit of modernity is undeniable; with respect to its method, its invocation of Chinese traditional culture served to arise people’s suspicion. In all fairness, it is more appropriate to recognize its value perspectives as “conciliatory” rather than “retro”. As American scholar Frederic Wakeman “revised”, the regime of the Kuomintang in Nanjing demonstrated a combination of Confucianism and fascism in nature.

大致而言，1934 年的新生活运动（当时简称为“新运”），是一场试

图通过援引中国传统的“礼义廉耻”来改造国民日常生活的社会控制运动。在史学界，关于该运动的争议焦点之一，是它的“复古”问题，尤其是所谓的复辟“封建礼教”。“复古论”不能说全无道理，但它却忽略了新生活运动对“礼义廉耻”的重新阐释，更忽略了运动中一直强调的建设现代国家和建构现代国民的目标。就目的而言，新生活运动的现代性追求是毋庸置疑的；就方式而言，其对“中国固有文化”的援引，确足以引发人们的怀疑。但平心而论，与其说新生活运动在价值取向上是“复古”的，不如说它是调和的。正像美国学者魏斐德（Frederic Wakeman）所“修正”的那样，国民党南京政权在性质上是儒家和法西斯主义的有机化合。

For those scholars who classified the New Life Movement as “retro” and were critical towards it, the root of their ideology may almost certainly be found in the May Fourth New Culture Movement. As one article describes, supporters of the New Life Movement pointed out that the New Culture Movement cannot be considered the Chinese Renaissance, and that the New Life Movement was a more appropriate cultural context—the article goes on to state that this is because the European Renaissance was “not a true retro movement”, was “ignited by the study of Greek and Roman archaeology”, and further developed to become more involved in classical literature and art with evaluation, resulting in “a brilliant and bright new cultural foundation”; compared to this kind of revival running deep in its own tradition, the New Culture Movement in China “has never established a solid foundation”.

认定新生活运动“复古”并对此持批评态度的人，其思想渊源差不多都可以追溯到五四新文化运动。因此，曾有新生活运动支持者专门撰文，指出新文化运动并不像人们比附的那样，是中国的文艺复兴，与之相比，新生活运动才真正配得上如此比附——这是因为欧洲的文艺复兴，尽管“并不是真正的复古运动”，但却以“研究希腊、罗马的古学”为开端，进而“对于古典文学及艺术发生新的兴奋和评价”，从而“产生出灿烂光明的新文化基础”；与这种扎根自身传统的复兴不同，中国的新文化运动“压根儿就没有树立坚固的基础”。

The Modernity Program of the Conservative Cultural Elite

保守主义文化精英的现代性方案

Fei Mu was once regarded as a film writer whose approach combined “modern thinking and nationality”. It should be said that he applied this integrated approach to both art and ideology. In 1935 Fei Mu’s work The Link was released, which was said to be a film aiming to “please the Kuomintang reactionaries”. Considering the filmmaker’s positive position towards traditional Chinese ethics and morality, The Link is indeed closely related to the dominant ideology of the Kuomintang regime, and even “completely consistent” with it. This film may be considered an important step for Fei Mu’s movement towards the integration of “modern thinking and nationality”. For the film’s artistic form, The Link features the combination of Eastern and Western values in aesthetics, the core of which lies in “digging out modern artistic elements from traditional Chinese art”. For its ideological content, The Link advocates China’s traditional Confucian ethics—Bi Kewei points out that the “core of the film is Confucianism”, especially the idea to “extend the respect of the aged in one’s family to that of other families; extend the love of the young ones in one’s family to that of other families”. However, the film is not a copy of Confucianism. Instead, it has been modernized. The commentary at the time pointed out that The Link “guides the stray towards a bright future instead of the old way”. In essence, this film reveals a modern ethical concept that integrates the traditional Chinese Confucianism with the Western fraternity. Its method is like the reinterpretation of “propriety, righteousness, honesty and shame” by the New Life Movement. Followingly, another study pointed out that the revival of the concept of “Extend the respect of the aged in one’s family to that of other families; ext end the love of the young ones in one’s family to that of other families” in modern China “fully reflected the restoration movement of a few people in China”, which implied that this film was influenced by the Kuomintang. Later researchers also asserted that The Link was used to propagate the “New Life Movement of Fascism” of the Kuomintang regime.

费穆曾被认为是一名融合“现代思维和民族本位”的电影作者。应当说，他的融合不只在艺术层面，也在思想层面。1935年费穆推出了《天伦》，根据传统说法，该片是罗明佑“为了讨好国民党反动派”而组织拍摄的。从其对中国传统伦理道德的颂扬态度看，《天伦》的拍摄确实与国民党政权的主导意识形态高度相关，甚或“完全一致”。可以认为，本片是费穆走向“现代思维和民族本位”融合的一个重要节点。就艺术形式而言，《天伦》显现了美学上东西方观念结合的特点，核心在于“从中国传统艺术中开掘出现代的艺术因素”。就思想内容而言，《天伦》宣扬了中国传统的儒家伦理思想——毕克伟（Paul G. Pickowicz）指出，本片“内核是儒家的”，具体地说，主要是“老吾老以及人之老，幼吾幼以及人之幼”的爱人思想，但它并非儒家思想的照搬，而是对之做了现代化的处理。当时的评论指出，《天伦》“指示给迷途的羔羊的不是来时的旧路，而是在旧路前面一条正途”。《天伦》最终呈现的，是一种结合了中国传统儒家思想和西方博爱精神的现代伦理观念。如此对待传统伦理，与新生活运动对“礼义廉耻”的重新阐释有相似之处，因此当时有人指出，“老吾老以及人之老，幼吾幼以及人之幼”的观念“在现代中国的复活，完全反映了中国少数人的复古运动”，其意在暗指《天伦》受到了国民党官方的操纵或影响。后世研究者也有人断言，《天伦》被用来宣传国民党政权“法西斯主义的新生活运动”。

“Feudal Ethics”: Family Monitoring and Female Discipline

“封建礼教”，家庭监控与女性规训

Some commentators believe that the female discipline of the New Life Movement is self-contradictory. As Song Meiling—the director of the Women’s Steering Committee of the New Life Movement Promotion Association—mentioned, “recently some people criticized that Chinese women could not contribute to the society and the country because the government advocated that women should go back to the family, which was a big mistake”; however, she also pointed out that women should ensure that “the family was clean and orderly, and children are healthy and behave well”.

有论者认为新生活运动的女性规训有自相矛盾之处。作为新生活运动促进会妇女指导委员会的指导长，宋美龄曾提到，“最近有人批评说中国妇女不能对于社会国家有贡献，是因为政府主张要妇女回到家庭去，这是很大的错误”，但她同时又指出，女性们应当保证家庭“是清洁的，有秩序的，他的子女是健康的，有规矩的”。

Another promoter also believes that “women in modern society should be able to shoulder the responsibilities of women in the family, and at the same time, they should be able to contribute to human evolution, the welfare of the people, and serve the society and the state”. If the emphasis on women’s responsibility for society and the nation belongs to the modernity of the New Life Movement, then it should also belong to the retrogression of “feudal ethics”. However, such an analysis is not accurate. Even the emphasis on women’s family responsibilities is still based on the nationstate, which is essentially different from the focus of “feudal ethics” in traditional society. For the New Life Movement, the reason families should live a “new life” is because “the family is still a very important unit in the organization of Chinese society, which may make ordinary families, and the customs and habits of society better”. Therefore, it is necessary to control society to achieve the goal of the modern nationstate. As an important part of the society, the family accepts their monitorization by the state administrative forces. Within this, housewives often occupy an important position in the family, so family monitoring is largely equivalent to the monitoring of housewives.

另外一位妇女新生活运动推动者也认为，“现代的妇女应该是能担负起家庭中妇女应尽的责任，同时也能够为人类进化，人群福利着力，替社会国家服务”。如果说强调女性对于社会和国家民族的责任，属于新生活运动现代性一面的话，那么其对女性之家庭责任的同等强调，就应该属于向“封建礼教”的倒退。但如此条分缕析并不确切。即便是对女性家庭责任的强调，其背后的出发点，仍然是民族国家，与传统社会中“封建礼教”着眼点有本质性的不同。在新生活运动看来，之所以家庭要实行“新生活”，是因为“现在中国社会的组织，家庭还是很重要的单位，能够使一般家庭的习惯良好，社会的风俗习惯也就自然会好起来”。也就是说，为了现代性的民族国家目标，要对社会实施控制，而家庭作为社会的重要组成部分，自然要接受来自国家行政力量的监控。由此进一步推演，因为家庭妇女往往在家庭中占有重要位置，那么家庭监控很大程度上即等价于家庭妇女的监控。

To sum up, in the New Life Movement, there is no gap, discord, or tension between the return to tradition and the pursuit of modernity. On the contrary, the movement claims that the return to tradition (“feudal ethics”) is a necessity, and the foundation for undertaking modern challenges. There are also several films concerning women’s family responsibilities in this period, the most important of which is probably The Doctrine of Women. According to the History of Chinese Film Development, the film was filmed and released at a time when the Kuomintang reactionaries were carrying out the “New Life Movement” and wantonly advocating feudal ideology and ethics to defend their military “encirclement and suppression” campaign. The “Doctrine” advocated by the film The Doctrine of Women obviously conformed to the requirements of the Kuomintang’s reactionary cultural propaganda at that time.

综上归纳，在新生活运动看来，回归传统与承担现代之间并不存在裂隙、龃龉和张力，恰恰相反，它认为，回归传统（“封建礼教”）正是承担现代挑战的必要和根基。此时期的电影，也有几部女性家庭责任主题的，其中最重要的一部，大概要数《妇道》。按《中国电影发展史》的说法，该片“拍摄上映的时间，正是国民党反动派搞‘新生活运动’，大肆鼓吹封建思想及其伦理道德来配合其军事‘围剿’的时候，《妇道》所提倡的‘道’，显然是投合了当时国民党反动文化宣传的要求的”。

Conclusion

结语

In the 1930s, facing the increasingly severe crisis of modernity in China, different people, organizations, and forces at that time put forward quite diverse solutions. In addition to liberalism and socialism among intellectuals, a certain number of supporters are also voting for a return to tradition to confirm one’s cultural identity; this is thought to be one of the solutions to the anxiety of modernity brought about by the impact of the West. The Kuomintang regime absorbed the latter, and through its promotion and propaganda, perhaps it also promoted the development of the return to traditional ideas, which was the driving force of the New Life Movement. In film history, the traditional ideas revealed by some films at that time, which I call “cultural conservatism”, is often neglected, or simply denounced as a regression to the reactionary regime and to “feudalism”. Just as “conservatism”understood as a social, political, and cultural trend of thought“is a wonderful combination of” ancient “appearance” with a “modern core” (Liu 1998, 15), these films are also a kind of modern expression of dealing with the national crisis at that time. As for the “combination” of “positive part, negative part and integrated part", or even the resulting cracks and paradoxes, it reminds us, once again, to pay attention to the complexity and richness of early film semantics.

到了 20 世纪 30 年代，面对中国日益深重的现代性危机，当时不同的人、组织和力量，均提出过相当多元化的应对方案。除了知识分子圈里的自由主义、社会主义等思潮之外，回归传统以确认自己的文化身份，作为应对西方冲击带来的现代性焦虑的方案之一，也有一定的市场。国民党政权对于后者有所吸收，经由它的推广和宣传，或许它还推动了回归传统思想的发展——新生活运动正是这种推动力量。而在以往的电影史叙述中，此时的一些电影所呈现出的传统面向——我称之为“文化保守主义”——往往被忽视，或者简单地斥之为向反动政权献媚和向“封建”的倒退，而实际上，恰如“保守主义”作为一种社会政治文化思潮“是‘古老’的外表和‘现代’的内核的奇妙结合”一样，49 这些电影也正是当时应对国族危机的某种现代性表达。至于其间所体现出来的“正反合”之“合”、甚或由此而来的裂隙与悖论，则再次提醒我们注意早期电影语义的复杂性和丰富性。

Journal of Chinese Film Studies

《中国电影研究》

主编：王海洲 金海娜

Journal of Chinese Film Studies立足中国，面向国际，旨在搭建一流国际学术平台，发表国内外高水平的中国电影研究成果，加强不同文化背景的研究者之间的对话和沟通，促进国内外电影研究界开展交流与合作，推动中国电影研究的全球发展。想与国内外知名学者一起探讨中国电影吗？赶快行动投稿吧！

编辑：卢楠