(AP)

I.

It was right before the Christmas of 2003, Yu Jie, one of the most famous “Angry young intellectuals” in 1990s, decided to receive the baptism of the holy spirit. On the day before the baptism, he told his wife Ning Xuan (Liu Min) “I don’t like cumbersome ceremony, and I’ll not kneel down in the baptism tomorrow.” Ning Xuan answered him, “baptism is a confession of your belief, it is your statement to the entire world, and to Satan as well. You shall join the legion of God from then on! You don’t have to kneel down as there’s no one required you to do that.”

The next day in a narrow and crowded room of Family Church, dozens of brothers and sisters gathered together to testify the simple but holy baptism. When priest Song Jun calledYu Jie’s name, he came forward and straight away knelt down there in front of the rostrum, and cried loudly…

II.

What happened to Yu Jie in the 1990s? And what kind of miracle converted him from a cynic writer to a humble servant of his Lord? His wife Ning Xuan has the details in this testimony named “How majestic is your name in all the earth” (《你的名在全地何其美》).

In 1999, Ning was working in a foreign-invested enterprise in southern China (while in real life, Liu Min was working in a bank in Wuhan), after came cross Yu Jie’s book “Fire and Ice” in personal reading, she couldn’t resist writing a letter to Yu Jie, who was still a student in Graduate School of Beijing University. It was the first time in Ning’s life to write a letter to a complete stranger. In her letter she said, “Under the sky which is no longer blue, the life is still worth enduring to the end if there’s another one can share the bitterness and cry with me together.” Among thousands of letters came from readers,Yu replied to Ning, many years later when recalled the memory he said he was having lunch when started to read Ning’s letter, and suddenly he felt his heart was hit by her words. These letters travelling across northern and southern China completely changed the life of both young men.

Ning left her job and came to Beijing. “Yu Jie, the poor student residing in student apartment, was the only one I know among 20 million people living in Beijing.” She said. “I had no fear at all and gave up everything for my love and future.” It was 2000, the beginning of the new century.

III.

I select the story of their love and translate it here, it was just the first part of their life. For more details of Yu Jie and Ning Xuan (Liu Min), please read the book “Vanilla Hill” (《香草山》) written by Yu Jie.  There’s an online version here (in Chinese).

related links:

The Extraordinary Love Story of  Yu Jie

Group “Vanilla Hill” on DouBan

名片上赫然印着：“书销中外六十本，诗译英法惟一人。”人说许渊冲狂妄，许渊冲觉得自己狂而不妄。

“妄”是浮夸、谮越、吹牛。许渊冲纳闷，“我的书就是六十本，现在比六十本还多，可以数一数。写六十本却说写了一百二十本才叫吹牛。”他是中国惟一能在古典诗词和英法韵文之间进行互译的专家，这一点也骗不了人。

“狂”是放达、豪迈、高行。夫子说，不得中庸，必也狂狷。在《论语》的英译本中，许渊冲把“狂”译为“radical”(激进的、奋发的)，切中孔子“狂者进取”的内涵。他说，“我们中国人，就应该自信，就应该有点狂的精神。”

89岁的老翻译家许渊冲，说话爱以“我们中国人”开头。在他那里，“我”与“我们中国人”，几乎是同一个主语。

“他嗓门大、很活跃、闲不住。个人理想与国家理想一致。”何兆武说。

1941年年末，太平洋战争爆发，陈纳德上校率美国志愿空军来华支援。由于缺乏翻译，西南联合大学外文系的所有男生被集体征调到了“飞虎队”。

在欢迎陈纳德的招待会上，一句“三民主义”让语言不通的宾主双方冷了场——没人知道该如何翻译。招待会的主持人是国民党高级官员黄仁霖，他亲自上阵，把该词勉强译为:nationality,peop le ’s sovereignty,people’s livelihood 。适得其反，在场的美国大兵更找不到北了。

联大外文系男生当时都坐在下面。人群中只见一个剑眉入鬓的男生举起了手，然后是中气十足的“大嗓门”：of the people,by the people,for thepeople.(民有，民治，民享)用林肯的话解释孙中山的话，宾主恍然大悟。

在西南联大，外文系的许渊冲总是给人留下很深的印象。“嗓门大、很活跃、闲不住，个人理想与国家理想一致”是他的同学、著名思想史专家何兆武的印象，而“有冲劲”是他的另一位同学杨振宁的评语。

他有个外号叫“许大炮”，总是心有坦荡，口无遮拦。再有棱角的人到中年之后都会被冷暖人情打磨得世故圆滑，可是直到现在，他的老同学提起他还是同样的评价，杨振宁甚至说，“我发现他像从前一样冲劲十足，如果不是更足的话。”

他评论中西文化：“希腊罗马都是小国，美国历史不长，才两百多年。中国五千年文化要走出去。”

他评说国内翻译界的现状：“‘精通’至少是要出版两种文字的中外互译作品，这也就等于外文界的诺贝尔奖了。”

他评点自己的翻译水平：“不是院士胜院士，遗欧赠美千首诗。”

他评价自己法国留学的意义：“假如我也去了美国，那二十世纪就不一定有人能将中国古典诗词译成英法韵文了。”

言下之意，深为中国翻译界捏一把汗。

《山西文学》主编、作家韩石山曾在某报发表了一篇文章批评他，题为《许渊冲的自负》。许渊冲也对答了一篇《是自负还是自信》，有理有节。投到同一报纸，对方却未予发表。老先生坦坦然地找到了韩石山，说“要不发在你们《山西文学》上吧？”对方也不是俗人，说，“好啊好啊。”于是成了朋友。许渊冲客厅里挂着“春江万里水云旷，秋草一溪文字香”的条幅，就是这位忘年交的墨宝。

这样性格的人在上世纪50-70年代会有怎样的遭遇，猜都能猜得出来。上世纪50年代“反右”时，许渊冲在北京两所外国语学院教英文和法文。他当时提了三条意见：一说毛泽东思想是应该发展的；二说斯大林肃反杀害好人太多；三说“共产主义”翻译错了，原文没有“产”字，这是日本人翻译的，就像把 “中国”译成“支那”一样，带有贬义；《共产党宣言》第一句说共产主义的幽灵在欧洲徘徊，“幽灵”不如改为“魔影”，“徘徊”应该改成“经常出现”——因为欧洲各国不会害怕徘徊不前的幽灵。

真是胆大包天。还好当时的领导认为他说的都是“学术问题”，没有给他戴顶“右派”帽子。但从那以后，许渊冲就再没摆脱过“狂妄自大”、“学霸”诸如此类的评价。

“文革”时，“臭老九”们都站在烈日下挨批斗，别人心灰意冷，许渊冲边挨批边琢磨怎么把毛主席诗词译成英法韵文，自得其乐。他对翻译要求很高，每句都得是妙语。原诗是有对仗、有双关，那么翻译也必定有对仗、有双关。

“山上山下，风卷红旗如画。”他译做Below/Below/The wind unrolls/Red flags like scorlls.“天高云淡，望断南飞雁。”他译做Theskyis high /The clouds are ligh t/The wild geese flying south out of sight.音美、意美、充满节奏感。

《为女兵题照》中有句“不爱红装爱武装”，他把“红装”译为“powdertheface”(涂脂抹粉)，把“武装”译为“facethepowder”(面对硝烟)，恰好表现了“红”与“武”的对应和“装”的重复，滴水不漏，堪称妙绝。

结果这些好诗为许渊冲招来了“一百鞭子”，原因是“歪曲毛泽东思想，逃避阶级斗争。”一百鞭子是造反派用树枝打的，一下都不少，打得许渊冲坐都坐不下来。他的夫人照君女士只好找了个救生圈，吹足了气，给他当椅子。

“那还译不译？”

“译啊，当时只有毛泽东著作可以翻译，不但毛主席诗词，我连那些传抄的都翻译了。”

“挨打了还继续译呀？”“唉呀，闲着更难受。”

“你几乎每天一个灵感，我多年才有一个。”杨振宁说

1998年暮春，德国艺术家组成的交响乐团来京演出，演奏了著名作曲家马勒的《大地之歌》。乐曲的第二章和第三章分别名为《寒秋孤影》和《青春》，特意注明是根据中国唐诗创作。

据报载，当时现场听众中不乏专家，都没有辨别出这两章到底来自哪首诗。其后各种文化类报纸都先后刊发了这两章德文还原成的中文，同时刊发的，还有李岚清副总理的指示：“一定要尽快把德国艺术家演奏的两首唐诗搞清楚。”

《大地之歌》中的唐诗，是先由法国女作家戈谢译成法文，编入《玉书》，再由德国作家哈依曼从法文转译成德文。现在又由德文译回中文，情境几多转换，文字扑朔迷离。《寒秋孤影》中“蓝色的秋雾弥漫在湖面上，青草叶上覆盖着严霜”，“我已困倦、灯已熄灭、诱我入眠”等句子引起了专家学者的多方推测考据，被媒体喻为二十世纪的“斯芬克斯之谜”。

“斯芬克斯”遇到了许渊冲。

据《文汇读书周报》当时的报道，《寒秋孤影》作者的德文歌词署名是TschangTsi,“许君一看就说：‘这是张继’。”他随即找出戈谢的《玉书》进行中法文比照，再按照这位印象派女诗人惯用的“拆字法”逐一分析诗中句子，终于找到了这两个章节的原型——《寒秋孤影》是张继的《枫桥夜泊》，《青春》是李白的《客中行》。

批评许渊冲自负的韩石山在同篇文章中提及此事，说，“这是要真功夫的。”

上世纪80年代开始，许渊冲开始致力于把唐诗、宋词、元曲翻译为英法韵文。翻译诗词的难处，在于炼字，经典好诗都追求一个“工”字。许渊冲译诗，既要工整押韵，又要境界全出，古典诗词有比喻、借代、拟人、对仗，译后的英法韵文中也要有比喻、借代、拟人、对仗，几乎到了苛刻的程度，唯恐糟蹋中国文化的好东西。他的老同学杨振宁说，“他特别尽力使译出的诗句富有音韵美和节奏感。从本质上说，这几乎是一件不可能做好的事，但他并没有打退堂鼓。 ”

就是这么有趣，如切如磋、精雕细琢本是一件“苦”差事，但对于有丰沛热情和深切热爱的人反而是乐事一件。许渊冲经常对着一首诗夙兴夜寐，忧急煎迫，灵感来了又眉开眼笑，喜不自胜。他的学生、清华大学副教授余石屹回忆他在北大教书时的样子，“骑着自行车，‘腾’地一下跳下来，就跟你讨论。”

杜甫《登高》里的名句“无边落木萧萧下，不尽长江滚滚来”，曾被著名诗人余光中看做无法翻译的诗句。“无边落木，‘木’后是‘萧萧 ’，是草字头，草也算木；不尽长江，‘江’后是‘滚滚’，也是三点水。这种字形，视觉上的冲击，无论你是怎样的翻译高手都没有办法的。”这句诗的翻译问题很典型，基本可以管窥在不同文化之间传达意境的难度。

余先生大概不知道，其时这句诗已经有“高手”翻译过了，而且还不止一个人。“萧萧下”是著名诗人卞之琳翻译的，三个字被译成 “showerbyshower(一阵又一阵、纷纷洒落)”；而其余部分是他的学生许渊冲完成的，以“hourafterhour(时时刻刻)”结尾，和卞译合辙押韵、珠联璧合。

无边落木萧萧下：The boundless forest sheds its leaves shower by shower；不尽长江滚滚来：The end less rive rrolls its waves hour after hour.“草字头”用重复sh(sheds,shower)的译法，“三点水”则用重复r(river,rolls)的译法。音义双绝，闻者称美。

许渊冲翻译的时候爱问自己：译文中能否看得见无声的画，听得见无声的音乐？这是他对译文的基本要求。前人翻译《诗经·采薇》，把“昔我往矣，杨柳依依 ”中的“依依”译做“softlysway”(微微摇摆)，把“今我来思，雨雪霏霏”中的“霏霏”译成“fly(飞扬)”，他看了不喜欢，觉得在“意境上和散文没什么区别”，非要达到“一切景语皆情语”。思来想去，灵感来了：“垂柳”的英文是“weeping willow ”,法文是“saulep leureur”,都有流泪的意思。顺着这个“突破口”，他把“依依”英译为“shedtear”,法译为“enpleurs”,挥泪离别之情出来了。

翻译《西厢记》是个大工程。这部被金圣叹称为“天地妙文”的奇书包罗了中国式戏剧的各种特点：铺垫、曲笔、借代、隐喻，仅杂糅在其中的各种元代俚语就够让翻译家挠头了。简单一例，张生初见莺莺，便大喊了一声“蓦然见五百年风流业冤!”什么是“业冤”，怎么解“风流”，如何让《罗密欧与朱丽叶》的读者读懂这些？

许渊冲的翻译是：Who is there if not the beauty who has sown love seed in my heart for five hundred long years!(那不是她么——五百年前在我心中播下爱情种子的美人。)

《借厢》一折中，张生描述莺莺相貌：“下面是翠裙鸳绣金莲小，上边是红袖鸾销玉笋长。”一句中两个借代——“金莲”和“玉笋”，都是极具“中国特色”的词汇，直译过去就会韵味尽失。许渊冲在英文中找到了同样有文化特色的词汇“lily-like(百合花般的)”来对应“金莲”，用 “taper(逐渐尖细的)来描摹“玉笋”,真就以韵文译韵文，以特色对特色。

到上世纪末，许渊冲已经出版了译著近60本，而到现在为止，他的作品已破百本大关，涵盖了汉英、英汉、汉法、法汉四种类型。英译《楚辞》、《诗经》、《西厢记》、《唐诗三百首》、《宋词三百首》、《元曲三百首》、《中国不朽诗三百首》几乎一气呵成。老同学杨振宁对他笑言，“你几乎每天一个灵感，我多年才有一个。”

钱钟书说:苏诗英译，壮举盛事

人人都知道，许渊冲三十年写百余本书，冲劲了得。但少有人知道，围绕着这百余本书还有若干故事、几多佳话。写书时有名师提掖，成书后有知己共赏，许渊冲译书著述的过程也是一本书，中国学界很多响当当的名字，都在这本“书”的字里行间出现过。

1980年香港商务印书馆约许渊冲翻译《苏东坡诗词选》。在众多参考资料中，他发现钱钟书的《宋诗选注》中，把熙宁五年认定为1072 年，而在另一本陈迩东注的《苏东坡诗词选中》，熙宁五年被认定为1071年，是一是二，不知如何取舍。钱先生还有一个观点：苏轼《百步洪》第一首是在描写水波冲泻，许渊冲在翻译过程中却觉得这首诗不是写“水波”而是写“轻舟”的，心中困惑。在西南联大外文系读书时，钱钟书是许渊冲的老师，现在遇到疑难，许渊冲马上写了封信向老师请教。当年6月14日,钱钟书回信了：

渊冲同志：

惠函奉悉。苏诗英译，壮举盛事，不胜忻佩。垂询数则，我家无藏书，东坡集亦不例外，未能检答，至愧。诗篇编年，可借冯应榴《苏诗合注》一查。陈迩东似亦据此。七二、七一或系排印之误，当时未检出者。《百步洪》四句乃写“轻舟”，而主要在衬出水波之急泻，因“轻舟”亦可如《赤壁赋》所谓“纵一苇之所如，凌万顷之茫然”，“放一叶之扁舟”(手头无书，记忆或有误)，境象迥别。匆此即致

敬礼！

钱钟书

六月十四日

我感冒发烧，恐耽误尊事，急作复，草草请原谅。又及。

那时“文化大革命”刚刚结束不久，学人心有余悸，学界风气未开。有同仁见许渊冲翻译苏诗，还曾以“翻译老古董”作评，说得这位“冲劲十足”的翻译家也有点犹豫。钱钟书先生回信第一句，就把汉诗西译称为“壮举盛事”，给了许渊冲无穷的动力。很多年后谈及此事，老翻译家仍然激动，说自己当时 “又感又愧，觉得如不翻译好苏诗，也对不起钱先生了。”

完成苏诗译稿后，同年年末，许渊冲又承接了香港商务印书馆的另一项邀约——翻译《宋词一百首》。当他译到李清照的《小重山》时，发现 “碧云笼碾玉成尘，留晓梦，惊破一瓯春”一句很不好懂。注释上说，“碧云”即茶叶，是否指《金石录后序》里“赌书泼茶”的典故呢？许渊冲与翻译家劳陇(许景渊)讨论，都没有把握。他凡事较真，又写信请教老师，得到钱钟书11月25日回信如下：

渊冲同志：

我昨夜自东京归，于案头积函中见尊书，急抢先作复，以免误译书期限。李清照词乃倒装句，“惊破”指 “晓梦”言，非茶倾也。谓晨尚倦卧有余梦，而婢以“碾成”之新茶烹进“一瓯”，遂惊破残睡矣。鄙见如此，供参考。劳陇君是我已故堂妹的丈夫，英文甚好，能作旧诗词及画，与我无师弟关系。匆此即致

敬礼！

钱钟书

廿五日

当时钱钟书刚刚从日本早稻田大学讲学归来，不顾旅途劳顿，马上回信，详细解疑释惑，让许渊冲非常感佩。在之后的几年中，师生往来信件不断，或讨论诗词典故，或讨论翻译理论，老师的点拨和提掖，许渊冲至今难忘。1986年北京大学举行首届学术研究成果评奖，许渊冲翻译、钱钟书题签的《唐诗一百五十首》获得了一等奖，他也把这一喜讯写信报与了老师，并得到了钱先生“实至名归、当仁不让”的赞誉。1987 年,四川出版社出版了许渊冲的英译《李白诗选一百首》，他马上寄了一本给钱钟书，收到了如下回信：

渊冲教授大鉴：

顷奉惠寄尊译青莲诗选，甚感。太白能通夷语，明人小说中敷陈其“草写吓蛮书”，惜其尚未及解红毛鬼子语文，不然，与君苟并世，必莫逆于心耳。专此致谢，即颂

暑安。

钱钟书上　杨绛同候

十一日

这里面有个典故。明人小说《古今奇观》里有篇名为《李白醉写吓蛮书》文章，说的是李白用夷语写信，回绝蛮邦使臣无礼要求的故事。钱钟书先生以此做比，说李白如果懂英文，又活到今天，和许渊冲必成知己。这是莫大的肯定。多年之后，许渊冲破译马勒《大地之歌》，从戈谢复杂的“拆字法”中找出李白名句“玉碗乘来琥珀光”的踪迹，说来也没有辜负老师“莫逆于心”的评语。

翻译的间空，老翻译家也写散文和回忆录，总之是“闲不住”。1996年他出版了回忆录《追忆逝水年华》，历数联大轶事，追忆联大师生，被评书人称“妙语连珠”。他自己觉得意犹未尽，又续写了一本《续忆逝水年华》，最近，还另起炉灶来一本《联大人九歌》，兴致高涨。记者最早看到《联大人九歌》，是在何兆武先生的案头。何先生对记者说，“你怎么不去采访许渊冲呢？他有意思。”

那一代联大人，几乎涵盖了中国当代最重要的知识分子群体。采访时，许先生兴致勃勃地给记者展示了一张照片，那是新世纪初杨振宁定居清华时，在京联大同窗的合照。照片中几位老友一字排开，从左向右依次是中国“两弹之父”朱光亚，翻译家许渊冲，物理学家杨振宁，经济学家王传纶，两院院士王希季。这次聚会是许渊冲组织的，他自豪地对记者说，“这几个人代表了联大的理文法工四专业。”

他是老友中的“活跃分子”，几乎和所有人都有联系。《追忆逝水年华》出版后，他马上给健在的师友和故去师友的子女们每人寄去一本，赠送不同的人还要题上不同的献词。

给汪曾祺的献词是：同是联大人，各折月宫桂。

给何兆武的献词是：当年春城梦蝴蝶，今日清华听杜鹃。

给吴冠中的献词是：诗是抽象的画，画是具体的诗。

给王希季的献词是：卫星是天上的诗词，诗词是人间的明星。

给杨振宁的献词是：科学是多中见一，艺术是一中见多。

书还赠送给了同学赵瑞蕻——另外一位翻译家。两人翻译路数不同，上世纪90年代中期曾就《红与黑》的翻译问题在报纸上展开论战，各执一词。许渊冲送书时也不尴尬，还是坦坦然地写了一句献词：五十年来《红与黑》，谁红谁黑谁明白。此事后来见诸报端，又引起评论者口舌无数。有人描述读许渊冲回忆录的感觉“在人情上，他似乎不是中国人。倒有点像是从新大陆来的。”他非常重视感情，又难说谙熟“人情”，狂做文章信手书，一章一句倒都是真性情。不过，这大概就是他自己这本“狂人日记”的有趣之处。

“你的成绩很大，没有浪费那些‘空白’。”萧乾说

和赵瑞蕻的的争论只是许渊冲的诸多论战之一。事实上，三十年来他面临的非议和质疑从来没有停止过。

和赵瑞蕻同译《红与黑》。赵翻译成“我喜欢树荫”，他翻译成“大树底下好乘凉”；赵赞成“市长夫人去世了”的直白，他喜欢“魂归离恨天”的婉曲。

和另一位翻译家王佐良讨论瓦雷里的诗《风灵》。对这首形容灵感来无影去无踪的小诗，王佐良推崇的翻译是“无影也无踪，换内衣露胸，两件一刹那。”许渊冲的翻译是“无影也无踪，更衣一刹那，隐约见酥胸。”他的看法是：“若用‘胸部’，既可指男也可指女，一点也不美。”

赵瑞蕻批评他：“许渊冲先生的译本加了许多不该加进去的东西。”王佐良则认为“酥胸”的译法是鸳鸯蝴蝶派，是应该特别避免的。许渊冲则大声反驳：一切景语皆情语，要的是文学翻译不是文字翻译。

这些争论都围绕着翻译的“真”与“美”、“神似”与“形似”的问题展开，实际上已经触及到中国翻译界的核心问题。在翻译理论上，许渊冲坚信自己的标准——“三美”——音美、形美、意美；“三化”——深化、浅化、等化，认为文学翻译要传情达意，“达意”是求真，是低标准；“传情”是求美，是高标准。围绕着这个理论，他还分别与社科院的江枫教授、南京大学的许钧教授、复旦大学的陆谷孙教授进行过论战。

这几次论战都很“火爆”，有的甚至称得上“剑拔弩张”。据说，王佐良先生当时真的动了气，表示不再在刊载论战的刊物上发表文章。可是没过几年，两个翻译家在某讨论会上见面了，许渊冲没事人一般拿着自己的新书送他，请他斧正。王先生无奈地笑说，“你以后少批评我两句就行了。”

还有一种非议是针对他的性格的。他在《追忆逝水年华》中大大方方罗列出了国内外对他的各种赞誉；在散文自选集里称“三美”、“三化” 理论达到了西方对等论无法达到的高度；在《唐诗三百首》的序言中写道：“中国人英译的《楚辞》，有的美国学者说是当算英美文学里的高峰；中国人英译的《西厢记》，有的英国出版社说可以和莎士比亚媲美，而这个中国人就是本书的英译者。”这些话完全不按中国式谦虚的套路出牌，难免让没接触过他本人的读者感觉“ 自大”。

当然也有很多读者喜欢这种“直性”：“自我彰扬比之窃窃自喜，更显光明啊。”

这只说中了一个方面。在采访中，记者的感觉是，他真诚地认为每个人肩上都扛着中国文化复兴的大旗，每个人脚下都是通向世界的路途。他在 “文革”中曾饱受苦难，但后来仍然庆幸自己没留在国外，因为“英文和法文是英美人和法国人的最强项，中国人的英法文居然可以和英法作家比美，这也可以长自己的志气。”

他的话题老是围绕着中西文化，里面充满着对民族文化的骄傲：

“西方对中国文化了解得很不够，中国的文化博大精深啊，世界独一。”

“我们中国人要知道自己的价值，我们现在文化上正处在一个类似于‘文艺复兴’的时期，不要妄自菲薄。”

也充满着对民族文化不能成为世界主流的焦虑：

“美国说我们没有民主，我说民主有两种。他们的民主重视‘民治’，我们的民主重视‘民享’，为什么说我们不民主？”

“在文化上外国人不理解我们中国人，我们中国人也理解错了外国人，我们现在要把真东西拿出来，纠正这两重错误。”

老同学何兆武谈起他这种“民族情怀”时说，“我们那一代人，曾面临过亡国灭种的危机，所以个人理想总是和国家理想一致。”这大概是后来更年轻的知识分子所不能完全理解的。

许渊冲戴过各种“帽子”——“文坛遗少”、“学霸作风”、“王婆卖瓜”，也戴过各种有形无形的“奖章”，得到过各种荣誉。前辈萧乾先生论写作，曾有一段著名的话：“创作家是对人间纸张最不吝啬的消费者，而诗人恰是这些消费者中间顶慷慨的。像一位阔佬，除去住宅他还要占一个宽大空白的花园……在那上面，诗人留下了无色的画，无声的音乐。”在《英语世界》举行的一次招待会上，萧乾对许渊冲说，“你成绩很大，没有浪费那些‘空白’。”

1999年，北京大学、南京大学、南开大学、浙江大学、南昌大学、广西师范大学等高校人文学院的10 位教授，共同提名许渊冲为诺贝尔文学奖的候选人。诺贝尔文学奖评委会的评委、女诗人Vallquist特地给他写了信，称他的翻译是“伟大的中国传统文学的样本”。老先生接到信，“狂劲”又上来了，说了这么一句话，“诺奖一年一个，唐诗宋词流传千年。”谁说诺奖能包举海内呢？这道理就如同许渊冲对老子“道可道，非常道”的翻译——Truth can be known,but it may not be the well-known truth.真理可知，但未必是你所认识到的真理。

钱钟书给许渊冲的书信之一

许渊冲精彩译文选登

大风歌

大风起兮云飞扬。威加海内兮归故乡。安得猛士兮守四方！

SONG OF THE GREATWIND

Agreat wind rises,oh!the clouds are driven away.

Icometo my native land,oh!now the world is under my sway .

Where can I find brave men,oh!to guard my four frontiers today!

江雪

千山鸟飞绝,万径人踪灭。孤舟蓑笠翁, 独钓寒江雪。

FISHING IN SNOW

From hill to hill no bird in flight; From path to path no man in sight. Alonely fisherman afloat Is fishing snow in lonely boat.

(光明日报)

(zonaeuropa) This is my second time in Xiamen. The weather here is great. No wonder people like to go outside and stroll. Hmmm … I just heard Teacher Deng spoke about certain issues on nationalism. I was reminded of a couple of sayings which I came across them previously. They are other people’s words, not mine. The first saying is, “Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels.” The second sentence is, “True patriotism is to protect this country so that it will not suffer any harm.”

For today’s talk, I have brought along a written speech in order to constrain myself. Mainly, I don’t want you to suffer any harm because I may stray all over the place. Let me begin.

Dear leaders, dear teachers, dear students, how are you? Do you know why China cannot become a grand cultural nation? It is because most of the time when we speak, we put “Dear leaders” first and those leaders are uncultured. Not only that, for they are also afraid of culture, they censor culture and they control culture. So how can such a nation become a grand cultural nation? Dear leaders, what do you say?

Actually, China has the potential to become a grand cultural nation. Let me tell you a story. I am the chief editor of a magazine which has yet to be published. The Constitution states that every citizen has the freedom to publish, but the law also says that the leaders has the freedom not to let you publish. This magazine encountered certain problems during the review process. There is a cartoon drawing. In it, there is a man without clothes — of course, this is unacceptable because the law says that we cannot exhibit the private parts in a publicly available magazine. I agree with that and I don’t have a problem with it. Therefore, I intentionally created an extra-large magazine logo to place at the illegal spot of the cartoon. But unexpectedly, the publisher and the censor told us that this was unacceptable too — when you cover up the middle part of a person, you are referring to the “Party Central” (note: “party” is a homonym for “block/shield” and “central” can mean either “center” or “middle”). My reaction was like yours — I was awed and shocked. I thought to myself, “Friend, it would be so wonderful if you could put your awe-inspiring imagination into literary creation instead of literary censorship.”

I use this story to tell you that everybody has good imagination. Yet we can only imagine many things but we cannot do them, we cannot write about them and we cannot even talk about them in many situations. We have too many restrictions. This is a restricted country. How can a restricted country produce a rich and abundant culture? I am a comrade who has few restrictions. But when I write, I cannot help but think: I can’t write about the police, I can’t write about the leaders, I can’t write about government policies, I can’t write about the system, I can’t write about the judiciary, I can’t write about many pieces of history, I cannot write about Tibet, I cannot write about Xinjiang, I cannot write about assemblies, I cannot write about demonstration marches, I cannot write about pornography, I cannot write about censorship, I cannot write about art. I am unable to write anything elegant. I am really incapable of writing anything elegant because I am not Yu Qiuyu.

Internet essays have more room. Many friends who write scripts. I know some friends who write scripts (such as Ning Caishen’s theatre scripts) and others who write movie scripts. They suffer a lot. Under such a cultural environment, I wonder how can China be a grand cultural nation. Maybe if the world is reduced down to China, North Korea and Afghanistan. Everybody knows that culture is out of bounds in North Korea. In Afghanistan, the situation with the nation is still unclear so they can’t be bothered with culture for now. Even so, they have a writer who wrote , which unfortunately was not published in Afghanistan. I think that once Afghanistan sorts itself out, it may possibly surpass China.

In our so-called international exchanges, we cannot keep bringing out the Four Great Works or the sayings of Confucius and Mencius. We know that this is like a conversation during a marriage interview. The girl’s side asks you if you are rich and you reply that your ancestors eighteen generations ago were very rich. That won’t help you now. We did not cause this tragedy, even though it is said that the road to North Korea is paved by the silence of everybody. On one hand, we are better than North Korea because we know what it is like there. On the other hand, I think that many of you present today are not silent — it is just that we are being harmonized.

In the history of the war against pornography in China, many fellow students are aware (even though these facts have been disappeared from the teaching materials) that Teresa Deng and Liu Wenzheng were pornographic, vulgar and indecent once up a time. When too many people listened to them sing, they became pornographic, vulgar and indecent. But when every Chinese person listened to them sing, they were no longer pornographic, vulgar or indecent anymore. If we all oppose cultural censorship so that the the only words left in the database of banned words are anti-human ones, we can create a grand cultural nation. It does not matter if my name or yours get added into the database. I believe that the database has a maximum capacity and every additional word will accelerate its destruction.

I hope that our news media workers, our students, our teachers, our cultural workers and our cultural lovers will try our best to reduce the censorship, and our leaders (who are not the same as our parents) and our government may have sufficient self-confidence to become more open. I know that our leaders like to export our culture because this is a sign of a strong nation. But I feel that our present culture is not exportable. In this creative environment, all writers/workers are constantly censoring themselves. How can any respectable work be produced in this environment? Around the world, you attempt to export Chinese culture by offering works that have been castrated like to foreigners. Do you think these foreigners are aliens from outer space? On the issue of whether China has truly risen up economically, I think we should wait until the real estate industry collapses because we cannot tell right now. But if a nation truly rises up culturally, it will be a strong nation and it will never have any fear of collapsing.

Finally, I want to return to the database of banned words. The more words are in that database, the weaker the culture of that nation will be. But our government gives you plenty of explanations. They tell you that this is being done to protect young people and to maintain social stability. Culture is free, so they have the right to censor any information or culture that may endanger young people or destroy social stability. But if you agree with that, then sooner or later that when you complain about what happened to you one day, they will censor you because you are destroying social stability. Any opinion that is disadvantageous to the ruling class or their interests destroys social stability and endangers young people. If we had put up with the Green Dam software back then, we would have Green Dam operating now. When that time comes, we will not just be looking at the demise of culture. So fellow students, we cannot let this day arrive. Otherwise, we will be the laughing stock in the electronic history books that our grandchildren will receive via satellite many years from now.

Thank you, everybody.

Via zonaeuropa.com
Translated by Roland Soong

Zong was the close friend of Former CCP General Secretary Zhao Ziyang, both of them came from Henan province and they fought the anti-Japanese war together in the 1940s. Between July 1991 and October 2004, Zong was the only people been allowed to visit Zhao Ziyang regularly. After Zhao’s death, Zong published his memoir in 2007. The book “Zhao Ziyang: captive conversations” is the record of his conversations with Zhao Ziyang who had been placed under house arrest for 16 years.

Zong was the Party secretary of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, he had been put under house arrest for a period of time after published his memoir.

Liu Xiaobo has received hundred thousands of US government funding via the NED in the past five years. Check NED’s China grants for Independent Chinese Pen Center and Zhongguo Minzhu magazine, which Liu heads.

If Liu is American he would be in violation of FARA (Froeign [Foreign] Agent Registration Act).

Following his reference, we’ve checked the website of NED ( National Endowment for Democracy ) and its grants for Asia Programs:

http://www.ned.org/grants/08programs/grants-asia08.html#China

To understand more about NED, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

The two organizations mentioned in anonymous comment are:

Independent Chinese PEN Center
$152,350*
To promote freedom of expression in China. Activities will include translation of materials on freedom of expression into Chinese, publishing banned materials to enable Chinese readers to have access to diverse views and literary works despite official censorship, and organizing domestic and international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers and journalists.

and

Democratic China, Inc.
$150,000
To promote well-informed and uncensored dialogue on issues relevant to China’s political development. The grantee will publish weekly the online Chinese-language magazine Minzhu Zhongguo (Democratic China), which carries news and analysis by authors inside and outside of China regarding current affairs, culture, history, and international relations.

The website of magazine Minzhu Zhongguo (Democratic China) is www.minzhuzhongguo.org which contains about 30000 static pages generated by ASP scripts, it ranked 656,938 on Alexa.com, the visitors’ geographic details are:
83.0% United States
6.9% Canada
10.0% OTHER

According to some threads posted in Chinese forum (search 刘晓波+NED), Independent Chinese PEN Center also received funds from other sources secretly. Liu Xiaobo was indirectly supported by a fixed income of tens of thousands of dollar every year, and his online magazine has annual budget of $136,000 funded by NED (unconfirmed information).

We have no intention of judging the links between these organizations and NED, also we don’t comment on the relation between Liu Xiaobo and NED. The China Times ( Chinais.com ) only focus on credible information.

We can find the brief of NED China programs on its website. Here is the full list of organization supported by NED ( Mainland China only, programs in Hong Kong not included here):

http://www.ned.org/grants/08programs/grants-asia08.html#China

Rule of Law and Public Participation
$180,913
To strengthen the rule of law, enhance citizens’ awareness of their legal rights, enhance norms of access to information and the free flow of information, and broaden participation in public policy debates. Projects will support a variety of educational, research, policy analysis, and legal aid activities.

American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$294,058
To empower workers, promote government accountability, and improve access to justice in China. The Solidarity Center, in cooperation with local partners, will sponsor research, education programs, trainings, and seminars to build effective networks in specific industrial sectors, as well as enhance the capacity of stakeholders to initiate viable labor regulation reforms related to worker safety and health.

American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$134,454
To promote labor rights and government accountability. The Solidarity Center’s partner organization conducts in-depth research on labor issues, disseminates a variety of research and educational publications, and engages in related legal aid and advocacy activities.

American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$120,418
To promote labor rights in China. The Solidarity Center will cooperate with local partners to conduct trainings and other outreach activities to raise awareness of labor rights, particularly as they relate to occupational safety and health.

American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$40,000
To promote awareness among Chinese workers of their rights. The Solidarity Center and its partner will continue distribution of its worker rights information CDs inside China as well as frequent interviews with the international and Chinese press.

American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$40,000*
To strengthen enforcement of the Labor Contract Law and other labor protections in China. The Solidarity Center’s partner organization will conduct education workshops for workers, and publish and distribute a study guide regarding the Labor Contract Law and other relevant regulations.

American Federation of Teachers Educational Foundation (AFTEF)
$40,000
To encourage the introduction of democratic teaching methods in classrooms. The AFTEF will assist local partners to conduct a variety of workshops and produce educational materials for distribution in hard copy and on the Internet.

Asia Catalyst
$15,000*
To function as a regional forum and facilitate cross-border linkages among NGOs. Asia Catalyst will develop a Chinese-language informational website that will include resources for NGOs and post information about human rights, social justice, and environmental protection initiatives.

Beijing Dongzhen-Nalan Cultural Communication Co., Limited (BDNCCC)
$36,500 *
To strengthen civil society and advance respect for human rights. BDNCCC will facilitate several trainings for civic groups to introduce to participants basic concepts of human rights and organizational development skills, such as management systems, leadership, and team building.

Beijing Spring Magazine
$180,000*
To publish the monthly Chinese-language magazine Beijing Spring, which carries analysis and commentary by authors inside and outside China regarding political developments, social issues, and the prospects for democratization in China.

Beijing Yirenping Information & Counseling Center, LLC
$70,000*
To promote the rule of law and the development of public interest law in China. The Center will maintain a telephone hotline to provide citizens with legal aid, conduct research regarding legal reforms and produce related public reports, make policy recommendations to relevant authorities, and hold a discussion series for lawyers and concerned citizens.

Beijing Zhiaixing Information Counseling Company Limited
$235,000*
To operate a diverse program promoting accountability and human rights. The work of the organization will include legal aid, investigative reporting, activist training, and human rights documentation related to HIV/AIDS and other public health threats.

Celeluck Company, Ltd.
$100,000*
To promote free discussion and analysis of current events and political issues. Celeluck will publish a series of Chinese-language books on issues related to the future of democracy and human rights in China. The organization will also continue to issue its monthly periodical, Open Magazine, known for its exposés and timely analysis of trends and newsworthy events in China.

Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE)
$167,708
To enhance the capacity of busin
ess associations and other NGOs. CIPE and its partner organization will collect and disseminate information on management best practices, and publish a guidebook promoting a better model of self-governance for independent organizations.

Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE)
$26,133
To encourage good governance and enhance private-sector participation in public policy debates on key reform issues. CIPE will support local partners in China to conduct regular symposia on China’s economic and governance reforms, in which independent voices can engage government officials in policy discussions.

Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE)
$94,182
To encourage advocacy efforts by raising awareness of key reform issues. CIPE will work with its partner in China to hold weekly policy forums. These forums will focus on themes such as political and economic reforms, civil society development, and social justice.

Center for Modern China
$261,000*
To maintain a forum for informed and responsible debate of public policy questions. The Center will publish Modern China Studies, a quarterly Chinese-language scholarly journal that features economic and social science research concerning liberal, democratic solutions to contemporary policy questions in China. In addition, the Center will engage in a historical memory project that gives voice to alternative views of an important historical event.

China Aid Association
$75,000*
To promote religious freedom in China. China Aid will publish the Chinese Law & Religion Monitor, a semi-annual journal containing analysis and documentation of religious issues and human rights abuses suffered by religious believers. China Aid will also maintain an online library of reference materials, including Chinese- and English-language full-text copies of laws and regulations governing religious practices in China.

China Free Press
$140,000
To expand the space for free expression. China Free Press will host banned and censored Chinese pro-democracy websites that provide a platform for discussion and debate on current events and pressing social, political and economic questions facing China. China Free Press will also maintain a dedicated civil rights page as a forum for reports, commentary, and appeals by citizens.

China Information Center
$410,000*
To provide an alternative source of news and opinion for audiences in China. The Center will disseminate news, commentary, and independent analysis of developments in China and important international events through two Chinese-language websites and an email list.

Democratic China, Inc.
$150,000
To promote well-informed and uncensored dialogue on issues relevant to China’s political development. The grantee will publish weekly the online Chinese-language magazine Minzhu Zhongguo (Democratic China), which carries news and analysis by authors inside and outside of China regarding current affairs, culture, history, and international relations.

Friends of China Labour Bulletin
$80,000*
To promote labor rights and government accountability. The organization conducts in-depth research on labor issues, disseminates a variety of research and educational publications, and engages in related legal aid and advocacy activities.

Human Rights in China (HRIC)
$430,000*
To advance internationally recognized human rights in China. HRIC facilitates the work of domestic groups in building an effective agenda for social, legal, and political development through collaborative research and education, print and electronic publications, and advocacy.

Independent Chinese PEN Center
$152,350*
To promote freedom of expression in China. Activities will include translation of materials on freedom of expression into Chinese, publishing banned materials to enable Chinese readers to have access to diverse views and literary works despite official censorship, and organizing domestic and international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers and journalists.

Initiatives for China
$75,000
To promote inter-ethnic understanding, mutual trust, and cooperation among prodemocracy activists from different ethnic groups in China. Initiatives for China will organize an inter-ethnic conference with conflict resolution workshops and panel discussions on democracy, human rights, and religious freedom.

International Republican Institute (IRI)
$400,000
To expand the space for civic engagement in China by supporting citizen groups and coalitions. The program will help strengthen the capacity of Chinese civic organizations and coalitions by providing opportunities for international exchange and by supporting partner organizations’ research, monitoring, and education activities.

International Republican Institute (IRI)
$45,000*
To promote legislative and legal reform on workplace and property rights discrimination. IRI will facilitate the work of its partner organization to conduct research and education activities, hold workshops, and develop and distribute a training handbook, model guidelines, reports, and other publications.

Laogai Research Foundation
$280,000
To campaign for the abolition of the laogai labor camps. The Foundation will carry out investigation and documentation of the Chinese system of labor camps, while also undertaking a program of timely research exposing other human rights problems in China.

Princeton China Initiative
$115,000
To promote media freedoms and civic engagement via the Internet in China. The program will bring together specialists in Internet technology to exchange information and create online tools that can be used by ordinary Chinese citizens, journalists and social activists for “citizen journalism” and civic-oriented, open communication.

Princeton China Initiative
$210,000
To promote human rights in China. The Princeton China Initiative will carry out a broad program of support for human rights projects to enhance transparency, accountability, legal knowledge, and access to justice.

Princeton China Initiative
$120,000
To provide an effective forum for free expression and stimulate liberal debate on China’s international role. Princeton China Initiative will publish China in Perspective Magazine, which will provide a pluralistic platform for Chinese writers to discuss issues related to comparative democratization, Chinese foreign policy making, responsible international behavior, and nationalism.

Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center (SMHRIC)
$75,000
To advance the human rights of ethnic Mongols in China. SMHRIC will report on the human rights conditions in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, also known as Southern Mongolia, through a website and an English- and Mongolian- language electronic publication, Southern Mongolia Watch.

Blogger “Under the Jacaranda Tree” has already translated part of the interview on her blog. part of translation comes from her contribution.

Cui Weiping: What’s your opinion on the jail sentence of Liu Xiaobo?

1, 钱理群 Qian Liqun: “I don’t think Liu Xiaobo is guilty.” Qian said that Liu has become more rational than he used to be in the 1980s.

2, 童庆炳 Tong Qingbing ( He was Liu’s tutor in Beijing Normal University): “We had enduring tutor-student friendship, I wish him well and take care.”

3, 王富仁 Wang Furen: “human are free in mind and limited in action. Freedom of thought shall not be interfered. China has always had this problem unsolved.”

4, 唐晓渡 Tang Xiaodu: Liu Xiaobo has demonstrated the responsibility and rationality of intellectual in the context of Chinese society.

5, 芒克 Mang Ke: We are very good friend and I don’t think he had done anything wrong. I wish him well.

( Five intellectuals above were inverviewed on 24th of December, before the judgment.)

—– After the judgment. —–

6, 秦晖 Qin Hui: “It is very sad to see that in this day and age people are still being punished for their words. I am not a Charter 08 signatory. But I defend to death other people’s right to express their views, even though I may disagree with what they say. I therefore strongly oppose the conviction of Liu Xiaobo because of his writings.”

7, 徐友渔 Xu Youyu: “Liu Xiaobo is convicted on charges in relation to Charter 08. Charter 08 is written in the spirit of the United Nation’s Human Rights Declaration. Therefore, Liu’s conviction constitutes a challenge to the idea of civilisation as commonly accepted by humanities. It threatens the right to freedom of speech as enshrined in China’s constitution. Most importantly, it goes against the conscience, not only of Chinese citizens, but also of mankind.”

8, 徐贲 Xu Ben: “(With regards to Liu Xiaobo,) it is hard to believe that a Chinese citizen will be so severely punished for exercising his constitutional right to express his views. China is a signatory to the United Nations Covenant on Human Rights. If China wants its rise in power to be recognised internationally, she must establish a reputation as a nation that practises what she preaches. It is not hard to tell from news reports worldwide that the conviction has damaged China’s reputation.”

9, 章诒和 Zhang Yihe: “In 1968, I was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment on counter-revolutionary charges. 41 years on, in 2009, Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment on charges of inciting subversion. Both of us have been incriminated for speaking out. This makes me wonder: how far has our political system been improved? Has our society made any progress?”

10, 袁伟时 Yuan Weishi: “This is the 21st century. How can one still be punished for his words? This is a violation of civil rights and a desecration of civilisation. It is, once again, an utter disgrace for China. Liu Xiaobo, who has been branded a criminal by the authorities, is now a hero in the eyes of the public. How can the ruling regime bridge such an enormous gap it has created with the general public?”

11, 崔卫平 Cui Weiping: “1. Charter 08 is set within the framework of the constitution and the framework of Deng Xiaoping’s political reform; 2. It does not make sense when people are not afraid any more; 3. This is the judgement of inquisition, how can you condemn someone’s thought are guilty?”

12, 乐黛云 Yue Daiyun: “1. I have read Charter 08. In my opinion, it expresses a hope for improvements and does not constitute subversion of state power; 2. Charter 08 is a discussion paper. It is against the constitution to convict someone for conducting a discussion. It will be difficult to persuade the public to accept the verdict; 3. If no one is allowed to speak frankly, how can there be improvements in our country?”

13, 钱理群 Qian Liqun: “I don’t necessarily agree with what Liu Xiaobo said or what he did. But that’s beside the point. Liu Xiaobo is a peaceful and rational critic. It is an admission of weakness to send someone like him to jail. I find this difficult to accept …”

14, 汪晖 Wang Hui: “Thank you for your letter and your phone call. I don’t agree with many of Liu Xiaobo’s points of view. However, I also object to the use of any means to convict people for what they have said. I will continue to monitor how this case will develop and will give my views when I have a better understanding of the situation.”

15, 丁东 Ding Dong: “Since antiquity many essays have landed their authors in jail. So you may well add another 11 years to the toll. The pursuit for freedom has never ceased and will continue, beyond 08. – A Sage has been born in China.”

16, 莫言 Mo Yan: “I don’t quite understand the situation and so I don’t want to talk about it. I have guests at home and we are having a conversation.”

17, 胡杰 Hu Jie: “The society is so open that the freedom of speech has become the consensus of the entire society. I don’t understand why they treat Tan Zuoren (谭作人) and Liu Xiaobo in this way, it is absurd and perverse.”

18, 余英时 Yu Yingshi: Liu Xiaobo has been in jail for three times since 1989. This time he was sentenced to 11 years, but every time after he was put in jail, he became more glorious. This time (after been sentenced) is the most glorious time in his life. There was another example in history a thousand years ago — Respected Fan Zhongyan (范仲淹). He criticized the government fiercely and had been demoted for three times. Fan’s friends felt honorable for him, and today we have the same feeling on Liu Xiaobo’s case.

19, 贺卫方 He Weifang: I was interviewed by foreign media not long ago:

Q: What’s your opinion on Mr. Hsiao-po Liu’s jail?

A: I don’t want to say anything.

Q: Don’t you think the sentence of 11 years is far to unfair?

A: For innocent person, even one day in prison is “far to unfair”, sentence of one day in jail is miscarriage of justice as well. Besides, do you really think that he will spend 11 years in prison?

(To be continued, 109 people were interviewed so far. The full list of interview in Chinese is here.)

In the editorial Wang reminded the days when he studied in the U.S. as a foreign student and the inspiration he once had when pursuing the social justice and news authenticity. He said he had never changed his faith in journalism.

The most important issue for me is to rebuild and advocate the journalistic ideas of Caijing Magazine — independent, exclusive, unique.

It is the fundamental basis of our mission to keep the independence of editorial right. We must consciously avoid being affected by commercial interests, and more importantly, resist the improper control imposed on us.

Bei Dao (Northern Island), a columnist of Caijing magazine wrote in his most famous poem 30 years ago:

“New changes and shining stars
Padding in unshaded sky
Shine on 5000-years-old Hieroglyphs
And staring eyes from future”

These lines exactly express my feelings at this time. A more open and diversified platform is ready for more young people.

– “The Insistence supported by Ideas – To Readers” by Wang Boming

Previous Report:
From Caijing to Caixin – Don’t Die Before You’re Dead

In my blogs (note: Yang Hengjun has blog presence at many Chinese blog service providers), many netizens post “anti-American” materials. Whenever I praise America or criticize China, they would post stuff about how awful America or the west is in order to neutralize the influence of my blog post on the readers. After a while, some of the comments of my blogs are a contest between my criticisms of China and their criticisms of America.

But I don’t know if they realize that while they intend to criticize America and the western countries for the sake of China, most netizens get more depressed upon reading their comments. Instead it is my essays critical about China that often give hope to my readers. Many readers have told me that was how they felt.

Why is this happening? In very simple terms, we live in China and who could be so stupid as not to be aware of the problems in China? If there is no basis for comparison, we will feel that we are destined never to rise out of those problems. If a comparison is available, we will think: we still have hope in finding a way out. Most of those critics of America are almost without exception citing “black secrets” that Americans exposed about America. They magnify these flaws which cause certain Chinese people to think: Oh, there is corruption and graft in America too? So this is a universal phenomenon. If corruption and graft happen everywhere, then it is natural too in China. Is there any hope left for the people in a corrupt nation? …

China is obviously making progress. In China, thousands of official newspapers and other media are publicizing the tiniest progress. Therefore, there is no need for a blogger to pile on. But most of their praises of progress are actually cover-ups for the backwardness. They have failed to mention the true progress in China. I would like to tell you about a recent matter which impressed me greatly. I got this impression when I chatted with overseas media workers, and I got it again when I met with friends recently in Hong Kong.

Twenty years ago, I frequently traveled outside of China. At the time, it was not easy for Chinese people to travel overseas. Each time that I traveled outside of China (including going to Hong Kong), I longed to read the overseas media and publications because I wanted to understand the China in which I lived and worked. At the time, many of the “scandals” in China were reported first overseas and imported back into China. In China, you suffered from these problems yourself but you “were not aware” and you had no opportunity to openly study and eliminate them. At the same time, a principal duty of intelligence service was to collect the views of overseas important government figures on the problems that China faced.

After the 1990’s and especially with the advent of the Internet to mainland China, things have quietly undergone a drastic change. Twenty years ago, if the Chinese wanted to learn about the problems that China faced, they’d have to travel overseas or else use overseas media such as CNN, BBC and so on. Twenty years later today, if the Chinese want to understand China, you definitely cannot depend on these overseas media. Instead, you should be looking at the variety of news on the Internet, including blogs, BBS’s and netizen interactions.

More than a decade ago, I went to America and I listened to the experts, scholars and government information/intelligence officers talk about the problems in China. I was impressed about how reasonable and thorough they were. A decade later now, I am no longer willing to waste my time talking to them about the problems in China. On the contrary, if they want to understand China, they need to talk to me.

Twenty years ago, I left China to go overseas in order to understand China. Twenty years later today, you have to return to China in order to understand China. How did this come about? This is not about the progress made by one person. This is the progress made by the times, the nation and, more importantly, the Chinese people!

In an era without the Internet, the Chinese media reported only good news and skipped the bad news. They praised the good to make things look swell. But everybody knew that China had many problems areas that needed improvement. However, only foreign media and publications can freely talk about our problems and flaws. In that era, even our senior leaders had to depend on the foreign media to understand about the sufferings of ordinary people. They even had to rely on overseas intelligence experts to understand the social problems in China and the potential solutions.

With the Internet, the Chinese people have a platform for expression to expose the problems around us. So we began to change. This is not a case in which the overseas media began to misunderstand China and “distort” their reports on China. Rather, we understand our nation better and we become aware the inadequacy of the foreign media in achieveing a full and in-depth understanding of China.

This is the biggest progress that I have seen in China. This progress came as a result of criticisms and not because of the effusive praises. The true wonder of America and other western countries is that all their flaws and ills come from the facts that are exposed by their people and even the government itself.

I have thought about the day when all the problems in China were dug out by the people themselves. We may not have become rich or strong overnight, and we still lag behind the west by a far distance. But we will catch up or even surpass them sooner or later. Let us now review the history of the People’s Republic of China over the last 30 years. We ask ourselves which advancement did not depend on the efforts (or even sacrifices) of Chinese people who dared to expose and criticize problems …?

Back to the “Cultural Revolution Context”, we may say that Bo engaged in “the struggle between lines within the party” — his ideas about the governance in China are different from Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao. Bo Xilai also inherited, developed Mao Zedong Thought and carried forward the class struggle in the new situation. From the perspective of modern political science, there will always be someone with his new and more effective strategy (or old tactic) to seek the highest authority within the power group. In the post-Deng period the Communist Party of China gave top priority to “stable” and it is absolutely not allowed to make noise even within the party, therefore, Mao Zedong’s favorite “line struggle” apparently disappeared. However, the desire for power is an aphrodisiac, and there’s no miraculous cure for people’s desire.

This new revolutionary route was supposed to be Hu Jintao’s “patent”, but unfortunately, he was afraid of “color revolution”. The difference indicates the ambiguous of “inner-party origin” theory: the “civilian-type” cadres who were trained step by step from the organization department have strong party spirit and sense of discipline, but lack of creativity; and cadres who were directly selected from “own children” are reliable, competent, but difficult to control — this dilemma unveils the success of Xi Jinping who understood the importance of balance in this competition.