위화와 “글쓰기 수련”

Abstract

Yu Hua’s literary thinking emerging in the latter half of the 1980s deserves attention in some respects, firstly, in the sense that it is more than the author’s literary settlement in the vanguard of experimental literature during the 1980s. Yet, it is not that simple as, most of all, Yu Hua attempted to build his own fictional world in the form of parables at that time so as to provide readers with what he considered a world of truth. Further, such parabolic true stories were not irrelevant to changes of trend in creative writing in the 1990s. Hence, the author’s literary tendency at that time is the touchstone of how he sublated the predominant ‘avant-garde literature’ in the 1980s. Yu Hua dealt with the reality and targets, which are revealed in the form of “parables”, while seeking earnestly how to take a look at the modern history of China and what the literature covering life should be. To approach Yu Hua from this perspective, it is necessary to address distinct branch points of changes in his creative writing. Although there are certain standard patterns in perspectives on dividing Yu Hua’s literary world, the content and its meaning have not been elucidated to the fullest largely because of two aspects. First, the author’s concerns are highly likely to have been overlooked due to the predominant focus on segmentation theory. Also, this may have resulted from Yu Hua’s sporadic statements of his literary position through the author’s prefaces, epilogues, proses and interviews. That is, investigators have had to accept the author’s stance in dispersal. Second, few satisfactory attempts have been made to estimate the changes in Yu Hua’s creative writing based on diversified grounds. Provided that Yu Hua’s literary world is divided into two tendencies, there should be a spectrum that is seated on the boundary between the two or that assumes the attributes of both at the same time. Then, it would be plausible to review a transition period as a part of diverse trials and groping. However, customary cliches of “experimental or realistic narratives” repeated countlessly seem to linger on too persistently. It is most important of all not to ignore the author’s voice. In addition, it should be reminded that such discussions began in Yu Hua’s own remarks at first and that his anguish and torment implied in his remarks were strongly associated with the literary situations in the latter half of the 1980s. Defining the author’s sedulous consciousness about his literary world as a certain or vague “memory” or “fate,” or regarding it as an “excessive pride” would be equivalent to underestimating his torment or anguish. Again, it is the author’s voice that matters. The present study aims to restore the transition period in Yu Hua’s creative changes, looking for his voices scattered.