LONDON – You
would think that the British, having practically invented appeasement, and paid
a heavy price for it, would know better. But appeasement of China
for commercial gain apparently is not considered morally repellent. How else
could Liu Binjie, China’s censor-in-chief and the point man for silencing the
Nobel laureate writer and human-rights activist Liu Xiaobo, be invited to lead
a delegation of 21 officially sanctioned writers and dozens of ministerial
minions to London to celebrate Chinese literature at the London Book Fair?
Indeed, Liu is the British Council’s guest of honor for the
event. The Council says that it invited officially approved Chinese writers
because it wanted to create greater understanding of Chinese literature and
promote cultural exchange between the two countries. But is it really true that
the world can or should learn about China
only by reading works that are sanctioned by the Chinese Communist Party? After
all, didn’t Boris Pasternak, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Milan Kundera, and Václav
Havel teach the world as much about the repressive societies in which they
lived than anything turned out by the Soviet bloc’s official publishers?
In his “My Statement on Leaving China” (去国宣言), Yu Jie, a writer who left for the United States in order to escape persecution, explicitly declared that he was forced to flee his country in order to write freely. Before his exile, Yu had been thrown into a dark room and tortured, because Liu Xiaobo won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010. Indeed, at the moment the award was handed over in Oslo, several policemen were pummeling Yu’s face, saying, “We are going to beat you to death to avenge the government’s humiliation.”
Today, China is producing literary exiles at a faster rate that the Soviet Union ever achieved. No British governmental institution would have invited the chief Soviet censor as its guest of honor at an event celebrating Russian literature. So, why the double standard?
We all know the answer: money. China has it, and Britain and other Western countries want it. They want Chinese consumers to buy their products. British Prime Minister David Cameron wants to change the fact that Britain exports more to tiny Ireland than it does to China. A little literary appeasement seems a small price to pay.
Today, growing political terror is having a stifling effect on Chinese society. More than 100 writers have been thrown into prison for publishing political essays on the Internet, and their family members have been monitored, or, like Liu Xiaobo’s wife, have been placed under house arrest.
Last year, the writer Zhu Yufu published a poem online, a verse of which reads: “It’s time Chinese people!/ the square belongs to everyone/ the feet are yours/ it’s time to use your feet and take to the square to make a choice.” For this, he was detained for “inciting subversion of state power,” and in February was sentenced to seven years in jail.
In repressive societies, good literature is by definition subversive. With the simplest of words, Zhu was attempting to awaken a nation, and, for China’s dictators, nothing is more subversive or terrifying than the word “choice.”
China is shipping 10,000 titles to the London Book Fair. That “choice” may seem overwhelming, but it would be safe to bet that not one of these books probes impartially the taboos of Chinese politics and recent history. In China, thousands of “sensitive words,”
including “self-immolating lamas,” “democracy,” “human rights,” “Tiananmen protest,” and even the title of my book Beijing Coma, cannot even be searched online. This ever-growing list of forbidden words and taboo subjects, drawn up by Liu Binjie and his army of censors, starves the nation’s soul and encages the minds of writers.
The British Council claims that it is showcasing “the amazing breadth and diversity of Chinese literature today.” But any genuinely diverse discussion would include not only the 21 state-approved writers on the list, but other officially recognized writers on the more critical end of the spectrum, such as Yan Lianke, who was refused permission to attend this year’s London Book Fair three times.
A diverse discussion would also have to include writers who have been completely silenced in China, such as Wang Lixiong, Tan Hecheng, Mo Jiangang, and Yang Jisheng.
The works of these banned writers are packed with vivid detail about contemporary Chinese life. Their literary power derives from their authors’ courage to ask awkward questions and write with honesty. The British Council’s decision to ignore them, as well as exiled writers banned from entering China, such as myself, has turned what should be a cultural event into an unprincipled commercial-political transaction.
Britain has not only produced great literature, but has an historic tradition of supporting free speech and providing refuge for persecuted writers. Not Napoleon, not Tsar Nicholas I, not even Hitler when he was being appeased in the 1930’s, could force Britain to compromise on its commitment to intellectual freedom. Instead, the task of corrupting a centuries-old humanistic tradition has fallen to the Chinese Communist Party’s ignoble censor-in-chief and engineer of China’s literary exodus – and to the greed of some for Chinese gold.
Ma Jian's most recent novel is Beijing Coma.
英國文化協會向中國磕頭
你也許還記得英國的綏靖政策在三十年代姑息養奸了德國的納粹主義，為此，人類付出了沉重的代價。但是英國文化協會為了商業利益和對中國的妥協，正排斥了道義的原則，把給諾貝爾和平獎獲得者劉曉波定言論罪的中國新聞出版署的頭目柳斌杰，以及他精心挑選的180家出版社和21名官方作家來倫敦展示這個全世界新聞最不自由的國家的管制成果。
柳斌杰是倫敦書展請來的貴賓。英國文化協會說邀請的主要是在中國寫作的中國作家，以便讓英國人更了解中國文學，以促進文化自由交流。但邀請的名單都是中國新聞出版總署認可的作家。我們不僅懷疑，中國共產黨能展示一個真實的中國嗎？或者說通過被審查的作品能獲悉中國的真相嗎？眾所周知，通過帕斯杰爾納克、索爾任尼琴、昆德拉和哈維爾等的文學作品，讀者們了解的真相，不比那些在前蘇聯、東歐以及中國極權監審下出版的書籍少。
英國文化協會故意模糊政治和文學的概念。他們對極權媚俗的同時，也是對被流放中國之外的作家和僅僅寫過些網絡文章便被監禁的良知作家的人格侮辱。讓不在中國的作家同時也不在中國文學之中了，以此來討好有了錢的中國政府。
年初從中國出走美國的中國作家余杰在他的“去國聲明” 中明確表示為了自由地書寫而被迫流亡。他僅僅因為劉曉波在2011年獲得了諾貝爾和平獎，便被警察關進黑屋遭到毒打酷刑，在挪威宣布給劉曉波頒獎的那一刻，警察邊抽余杰的臉邊罵：我們打死你來報復他們。你們給中國政府丟臉。他的手指和肋骨幾乎被砸斷。
今天，中國的流亡文學早己超過前蘇聯和今日的伊朗、北朝鮮等，成為流亡和獄中作家的超級大國。我想，沒有哪個英國政府的機構敢請前蘇聯的審查官員，來慶祝俄國文學的審查成果。因此，這種雙成標准我們都知道，那就是：錢。中國有，英國和西方國家想要。他們要中國的消費者購買產品。
英國首相卡麥倫想要改變英國的經濟狀況，那就是增加出口，把英國產品超過小國愛爾蘭賣到大中國去。用文學和自由思想的妥協換取更大的價格優惠？
今天的中國，深層的政治恐懼己把中國社會變得很壓抑，已經超過一百多位作家僅僅在網絡裡寫過幾篇政治隨筆就被關進監獄，而他們的家庭成員也被監控﹔像劉曉波的妻子，不知被軟禁在了哪裡？
去年，作家朱朱虞夫因在網上發表一首詩：是時候了/中國人/是時候了/廣場是大家的/腳是自己的/是時候用腳去廣場作出選擇……。就因為這十二行的詩，他被中國新聞出版總署查禁定罪，關進了文字獄，重判七年。朱虞夫僅僅用了最通俗的幾個詞，試圖讓麻木的中國醒來。我相信，在專治社會，有思想的文學必須具有反叛意識或者批評精神，但中國的獨裁者們最害怕的就是你沒與黨保持一致，你竟然自由地選擇。更可怕的是，失去了獨立意識，作家隻能是籠中之鳥了。
中國新聞出版總署把10,000多種不同類別的書籍運到了書展，看起來會是壓倒一切國家的優勢。但我敢打賭這批經過審查的書，〔除了菜譜和名勝古跡〕不會讓你查閱到現代和歷史的真相。在中國，甚至我從未在國內出版的書名《北京植物人》都被封鎖了。〔你隻能在新浪網上查到“北京植物”〕
被封鎖的關健詞不僅包括如陳光誠、劉曉波、六四天安門事件，還包括每天發生的社會新聞，如“喇嘛自焚” 、“方勵之去逝” 等成千上萬個敏感詞，而且有增無減。
中國新聞出版總署的柳斌杰和他的審查團隊正把這種思想審查經驗帶到倫敦書展，並且把中國少有的獨立靈魂，一個一個地鎖進了籠子裡不放出來。用中國官方報紙的話叫“統一了思想”
。連稍有反思精神的作家閻連科申請來倫敦書展，三次都不獲中國新聞出版總署批准。
英國文化協會聲稱他們是介紹了一個真正多元化的中國文學。但是多元化不應僅是二十一位從老到小的中國作協作家，而是要包括官方之外，有批判思想的民間作家和被政府關進監獄、趕出中國的作家，包括如不能自由發表出版的作家唯色、王力雄、譚合成、莫建剛、楊繼繩等人。
這些作家會讓英國人看到中國的另一面。那被禁止的作家作品，充滿了當代中國人生活的生動細節。 他們的文學精神起源於個人的勇氣和自由表達的欲望，在一個謊言中國裡更凸顯了誠實寫作的珍貴。英國文化協會還排除了被極權政府禁止進入中國的流亡作家，這種忽略是在參與迫害，是把代表自由交流的書展，變成僅僅與中國毫無原則的商業政治交易。
英國不僅產生了偉大的文學作品，還有支持言論自由和向被迫害的作家提供避難所的歷史傳統，它不會聽任拿破侖或者蘇俄沙皇尼古拉，更不會向希特勒或斯大林妥協對言論自由的承諾。但在今天，堅守了多年的人文主義傳統，竟敗壞在了不斷制造流亡文學和獄中作家的中國文字審查員手中。