Ma Jian, one of the most influential modern Chinese
writers, has published a new novel that starts with the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy demonstrations of 1989. After beginning his career as
a photojournalist in the 1970s, Ma quit that job, travelled across
China for three years - a journey he
later described in his book ‘Red Dust’ – and wrote a novel ‘Stick Out Your Tongue,’ set in Tibet, which was
severely criticized and banned by the government. In 1987 he moved to Hong Kong; after its handover to China ten
years later he moved first to Germany
and then to London. His new novel ‘Beijing
Coma’ tells of a student shot in the government crackdown on the Tiananmen
student movement of 1989, who remains in a coma for the next decade – but who
gradually becomes aware of what’s going on around him in China’s post-Tiananmen society. It’s partly a fond memoir of the 1980s as a
time of idealism and youthful romance. But it’s also a savage critique of
contemporary society – and an attempt to secure a place for the events of 1989
in the Chinese collective memory. Newsweek's Duncan Hewitt spoke to Ma Jian about the book
and his views on China:
Hewitt: Why did you publish a book about 1989 so many
years later?
Ma: I’ve had the idea for this kind of story in my
head for many years… You may know that
a few days before June 4th 1989 my brother had a fall and became a ‘vegetable’
- went into a coma. It was an accident; someone had hung a rope between two trees to
dry their clothes, he was running past, and the rope caught him by the neck and
pulled him up – he flew into the air and fell back onto the ground – this was on
28th May [1989]. After his
fall I rushed from Beijing to Qingdao to see him.
So in a sense he brought me back to Qingdao and therefore I
wasn’t in Beijing at the time of the massacre, it’s very strange - as though
one life was exchanged for another. Because
if I’d been in Beijing I might well have lost my life, I was on Tiananmen Square
every day observing what was going on. And
as I sat beside my brother’s body in the hospital I was always thinking about
this subject: a person in a vegetative state is a body which is dead, but its
memory is still alive; I really wanted to describe this kind of life. In fact someone in this state can’t live for
so long, and won’t wake up – but in the book I wanted to use this as a kind of
symbol.
My point is that when he wakes
up ten years later he discovers that he’s the only one who’s retained his
memory – because people living in real life, whether those who are in the
Communist Party or those who are under their control, are all collectively
forgetting this period of history. Parents
won’t tell their children about it – some clever kids ask their parents, but
they tell them you’d better not know – don’t ask about this. So they’re all trying together to find way
to forget this history. And he [the
character Dai Wei in the book] is the only one whose memory hasn’t been taken
away by others, the only living person who still has a memory…. So reality is
the world of the comatose person, and his memory becomes alive - my aim is to
say that we can live in our memories, or we live in our memory
Q: Did you feel that the events of 1989 needed
someone to write about them in a literary way?
A: I originally didn’t
intend that this book would be representative of June 4th at all. I was always asking my friends, why didn’t
any of you who were in the square at the time write anything about it? I’ve read a few stories but none had real
literary strength, and I thought this is really weird, so this [duty] fell on my
shoulders… [First] I wanted to write
about someone in a coma, I’d already got into this subject – because it was such
a coincidence that my brother became a vegetable just at the time. As I watched him at the time I was thinking
of what had happened in the square, the killings… so all these things entered
my mind together. My brother died, but
he was alive too: and then everyone started lying, only he didn’t… He was the
only one they couldn’t arrest - already dead, but his mind was alive.
I felt I just had to write
this… So in the end, by chance really,
I combined the crackdown and a person in a coma with my own experience into a
single whole. I wanted to combine the
absurd life of someone in a coma with his real experiences… So you have a
person who’s been living in a coma for ten years – and the things happening
around him in real life are absurd – for example in the book his urine is turned
into a medicinal drink to cure illness.
I wanted to satirize not just commercialization but people’s loss of
faith and beliefs.
Q: How long did it take you to write?
A: It took me ten years, partly because it was really difficult to write: one aspect is
the historical difficulty – I wanted to know everything [about what happened in
89], about all the people who took part, their roles, what they said, what they
felt at the time, what they feel about their history. So I did a lot of work, I talked to a lot of people… and I read
almost everything on the internet, as well as records and eyewitness accounts
published at the time. I also used my
own memories from the Square.
Q: What were you doing at the time?
A: I was there for around
a month – I didn’t join any of the [activist] groups, I didn’t want to… I wanted to be there as an observer. I was living
in Hong Kong then and went back to Beijing specially – I took my camera, went
to a lot of universities and read the posters, helped them write some... My
main feeling was that Chinese democracy had hope. At the time almost everyone - not only opponents of the party but
lots of officials also - came out [to join the demonstrations], so the movement
included the entire population, apart from the army – it was maybe the only
time when all the Chinese people were so united, a rare moment.
This background
is very important to my book – that if you compare before and after June 4th
1989 the Chinese people totally changed. I was really surprised by this. For example just 20 days later [after the
crackdown] the same Beijing citizens who had been giving water, steamed buns
and popsickles to the students were suddenly denouncing the
students, helping the police to arrest them, wearing their red armbands again.
Q: Not all the Beijing people turned against the protestors like that.
A: Not all. But it shows how fear of political
power can make people change at any moment.
So this had a big impact on me at the time… Also you found that overnight the government had already changed
history: a democratic movement had turned into a counter-revolutionary riot
within a few hours. It was frightening.
Q: Are you writing about real people in the book?
A: No – after I’d
collected all the material I combined some real characters to create composite
characters. But all the main characters in the book were not real people… I feel that we can respect history without
describing history. I respect history greatly, but from a literary point of
view you don’t need to describe history all over again. I’m not interested in that.
Q: But you go into a lot of detail.
A: Right: even people who
were in the square after reading my book have to acknowledge that that’s how it
was. I wanted to combine the most
realistic things and most absurd things - for me this was my challenge.
Q: Why don’t you think other Chinese fiction writers have
written much about the events of 1989? Is it just because they’re not
allowed to write about this subject?
A: No, that’s not the
reason: In China they don’t control what you write, they only care about
whether you publish it or not. But I feel in China’s current reality people
have become fragile. So people who went through June 4th don’t have
the energy to face up to what happened.
I even feel that now in China the faster you forget something, the
greater a writer you are, the more advanced you are - it proves that you’re
writing literature, that you have nothing to do with politics…This is a particular situation in China. I
think it’s a kind of weakness.
Q: You also write a lot about what happened in the
decade after 89:
A: Of course I’m always
interested in Chinese society and how it’s changing, and I want to describe
these changes…
Q: You make it sound like a pretty terrifying
society – there are lots of shocking or grotesque things in the book…
A: In real society
there’s one thing I find scary – that people don’t want to reflect, don’t want
to face history. They want to live in a vacuum. This vacuum can make you very happy for a while, but you can’t
dare to connect with your experience, your memory. And it’s not just the party which doesn’t want to make this kind
of connection, I think ordinary people don’t want to do it either. It’s like the way the French have amnesia
about what was done by the Vichy government in the Second World War: they
killed Jews, helped the Nazis - but then after the war everyone pretended they
didn’t know anything about this period of history.
A: You also write about a lot about earlier political
movements –including those which protagonist Dai Wei’s parents experienced in the 1950s and
60s. Was it important to you to include
this?
Q: It’s very important: I
feel that in any nation - whether German, French, Chinese, Japanese - if you forget history then I don’t think you can be a great
nation… You become very weak, I
feel. Whether or not a nation really has a soul is connected to whether
or not you can face your entire history, not just the parts of your history
that you choose to remember. A nation
which runs away from history is always a weak nation…
Q: But lots of people in China would say ‘we know
this history, we know what happened, but we feel that there are more important
things to worry about at the moment, we have to look forward…’
A: Yes – for Chinese
people the ideal state is to forget history and look ahead, earn money - but I actually feel that all the nation’s problems are now being revealed, [such as] low morality. Our nation doesn’t have a concept of values, so the way we
decide between right and wrong, our standards of behavior are all random, bizarre.
Q: The government has talked a lot about moral
standards recently. Isn’t it aware of this problem?
A: Yes but the problem is
that these standards are the bare minimum – just about enough to qualify you to
be a person! Which means that our
standards have really fallen low. One main reason is that we have never gone back to the point in our
history where we fell down, and tried to stand up again at the same place...From the point of view of psychology,
someone who doesn’t dare to admit that they’ve been hurt will always be sick, can never be healthy.
Q: Some will say you’ve been abroad for a long
time, you don’t know everything about Chinese society anymore. There are lots of problems, but
many intellectuals would say there are new NGOs and grassroots activism, and people are very sincere about these things. Yet in your novel China seems to be a totally
corrupt society.
A: I think that if we’re
outside China we can see it more clearly – I can only see the shape of a
mountain if I’m not on it – the people who live in the mountains can’t see it. Plus with the internet, I think I know more
about Beijing than lots of people who live there. They may only know one part,
and I go back every year: the prices, which houses have been demolished, where
they’ve dug a ditch, I may be more aware than people who live in Beijing,
because they may only stay in one area. I go all around. I don’t feel I
don’t understand this society. And people
will also say 'You don’t live in this society so you don’t have the right to
criticize it'. I feel this is complete
rubbish. It’s as though if you’re not
Chinese you’re not allowed to talk about China’s problems – that’s completely
ridiculous.
Q: Do you think people in China would be
interested in this novel if they had the chance to read it?
A: I don’t think they
would be interested. To them, this
period of history has not affected China’s development – they mean China’s
economic development. They think the economy is so good now why should we go
back and remember that period of history? But I feel that when the economy gets
strong and people have the ability, they should go back to history and slowly
reassess it… to give a fair judgment to the people you’ve abandoned and
forgotten. If you still trample these
people under your feet and say ‘you lost’, then I think you’re a bad person.
Q: You mean the victims [of 1989]?
A: There are too many
victims in Chinese history… But if you ask one of the Chinese students in
London they’ll think you’re strange, they’ll say, ‘No there aren’t any. My parents are all fine, my grandparents
too, they haven’t suffered’. I often hear this.
Q: So did you write this book because you felt the
young generation has lost this memory?
A: Of course. If young people do have any memory of what
happened, then they’ve already consciously or subconsciously closed their minds
to it… I find a lot of young Chinese
people are like this. It’s very hard to tell them that history is important;
they say, oh that’s my parents’ problem, now we’re fine…
Q: Is this [attitude] because of patriotic
education…?
A: It’s connected to the
party’s patriotic education.
Q: Is it only because of education or because
this generation is just different anyway?
A: Both factors
are relevant. The values we got rid of during the period of socialism
- such as materialism - have now become the most trendy things, the very values
people admire most in Chinese society, such as money. So as our values are overturned, you find that young people are
not aware of their own problems… Since they were young, their parents, and society
have given them patriotic education, which in fact is education in how to love
the Party – dyeing them red! …
Also
because the nation has no faith, and because since 1989 you’re not able to critique
morality: people don’t dare to discuss moral questions. The party doesn’t
dare either, because they’re the ones most lacking in morals. So they turn morality into something very
naïve and childish, a question society can’t face up to. So in these circumstances young people chase
after money – the party has opened up this route for them and said ‘do what you
like’. So it’s become very absurd and lopsided - as though you have two hands and one of
them can grow as much as it wants, but the other hand… sorry, you’re not
allowed to move it.
Q: Are you mainly talking about the decade after 1989? Now authorities are talking a lot about
morality?
A: My point is that when they
start talking about morality it shows there isn’t any morality.
Q: But do you feel the 90s was a key period in
this change?
A: My point is that when
they fired their guns on June 4th they didn’t just kill the bodies of a
few people or a few thousand people; I feel those guns killed the soul of the
Chinese people… Since then Chinese people have changed – they’re not so genuine
– whether in business, all these fake products, I feel it’s because people’s
souls are fake. And this is directly linked to 1989.
Q: Since June 1989 have you always felt that
those events cast a shadow over you?
A: It’s very hard to get
away from it – I feel that every Chinese person, however wealthy, cannot get
this out of their mind. We can pretend we’ve forgotten – but you can’t forget
what’s really inside.
Q: Do you depict the students as naïve, or
idealistic, or as heroes?
A: These students all had
a similar education – under the red flag – but all had slightly different
backgrounds. The more someone’s family suffered [in the past] the more they might be able
to reflect on things, be more aware of dictatorship, more likely to call for
democracy...But at the time many didn’t really understand the meaning of
democracy, because they were too young, and because of their education – some
of them just went then to the library to check what the US constitution was… Still they had an instinctive sense that people need freedom and democracy –
though many just blindly followed the student leaders. Previously they weren’t interested
in politics. They spent their time playing mahjong, chasing women, trying to go
abroad, very few seemed concerned about fate of China.
Q: People who went through 1989, particularly as
students at the time, often say their generation understands politics – because
they saw for themselves what it can do.
Do you think some of them might still have some ideals, might still want
to create something in society?
A: I think to simplify you
can call them the Tiananmen generation. This generation, wherever they are
in the world, they are still a generation with ideals – because this historical
incident was forcibly etched in their mind.
Wherever they work....if they have a chance
they will try to move this society towards democracy or in a positive direction
- that’s certain.
Q: Their ideals haven’t been destroyed? They’re
not just interested in earning money?
A: I’ve met some in
China who are millionaires but they’re still idealistic. They keep it well-hidden. They say they’re
not interested in politics, but I think if they have a chance...any
[future] changes in Chinese society will still have to rely on this group of
people… So some people are still really nice, still striving – but others have
been destroyed. There are two kinds.
Q: There’s a lot about the ‘80s in the book: do
you feel that was a very important time for modern China? Because there certainly seems to be a lot of
nostalgia for that period in China now…
A: If there’s a chance
for people to be nostalgic about the 80s then maybe if you go a bit deeper this
[feeling] will include June fourth: because that was the high point of the 80s. So maybe this nostalgia for a time when people
were idealistic, though poor, might lead to something like this, that’s a good
thing… I feel that the 80s were a time of opening up, despite the various
political campaigns of the time. It was
a time when we emerged from Mao’s dictatorship to a time when the party no
longer regarded Mao as a good – the era of abandoning Mao Zedong thought. So dictatorship ended and we moved towards authoritarianism
– which was relatively much more relaxed! (Laughs) So in our memory the ‘80s
gave us a lot - at least now we knew who Ginsberg, Marquez, Kafka, Hemingway,
Faulkner [and] Freud were.
Q: Recently we’ve seen young people expressing
their anger at the West. What’s the difference between students now and those
of the 1980s?
A: There’s certainly a
difference... ‘80s students were idealistic: OK, before the student
movement they were playing mahjong, chasing women, going to America, but as
soon as this movement came along they all got so involved: so this apparent lack
of ideals was false – they had had no choice, because the party didn’t give you
the opportunity.
But now young people
really do have the opportunity to choose idealism – but I think they
intentionally don’t want to, they look down on it. They feel that in this system we can live comfortably, so
there’s no need to challenge the government.
The ‘80s’ students were
attracted to democracy and to the US; today’s students are the opposite: they look
down on democracy and the US, their values are completely different. They can
study in Europe, go to school in the US, but they don’t like the US – they
think that authoritarianism (zhuanzhi) is actually good: it keeps some people under
tight control, and the others have the chance to earn money…. So they’re not
interested in politics
Q: Are there exceptions?
A: There
are too few [exceptions]. Most of them still read the Chinese news websites –
they think that the foreign media write too much about the negative side of
China. So they don’t read it. I often
forward them information about foreign websites that [Chinese] intellectuals
often read, and then I ask them if they’ve looked at them – but they don’t look
at them; it’s bizarre.
Q: Is that because they’re scared?
A: It’s not fear – they
despise these things.
Q: Has government turned their ideas of
youthful rebellion around so that they're targeted against the West?
A: They’ve turned the
party, the nation and the individual into one thing – this is what the party
wanted, these are the kind of people the party wanted to produce. But that’s not so strange. What is strange is that when they go abroad
they don’t have the ability to choose different views of their own.
Q: You’ve said that you think the recent protests
against Western individuals and media [over the Tibet unrest and so on] are very significant…
A: It’s extremely important. All these demands for people to apologize to
China – this has become a problem which contemporary people must face up to. I say to people [abroad], if you don’t pay
attention to this, the next person who’ll have to apologise will be you... This
culture of apologies is similar to Islam – but in China it’s for political reasons.
I think it’s terrible... As soon as someone speaks you say ‘you’ve
attacked me’. Have you seen Western people asking China to
apologize for anything? This [expression of different views] is normal life in
western countries… We can’t allow that
in the early 21st century we should become so narrow [in our
thinking] – this is tragic.
So my point is that
these young people all look same as everyone else on the outside, and they’re
very nice and polite. But their whole political system, their soul, has been
created by the communist party. So for
example when there are problems with the Olympic torch relay they’ll come out
of every corner of your Western society… Normally they’re all separate, but as
soon as the [Chinese] embassy calls them out they come together.
Q: But maybe the western media does sometimes
present a simplistic picture of China, or sometimes it may reflect some prejudices?
A: That doesn’t matter.
Only China has this wenziyu – that if
you write something wrong you have to confess to a crime. In the west,
whatever I’ve written I haven’t killed anyone, this isn’t a crime…
Q: You’ve described this clash of values in terms
of a new Cold War…
A: People felt
that the so-called socialist camp -- the Soviet Union or China -- had already collapsed,
and that commercialization and middle-class development meant it would slowly
vanish. But I think western people are too optimistic: ideology doesn’t just arise
in a day. The party spent years making it part of everyone’s spirit, you can’t
just get rid of this immediately. And so once [Chinese] society gets wealthy, a new cold war may begin. Of course it’s no longer so overt – not
promoting Marxism or Maoism in the same way – but I think in the future this
[kind of thing] will continue to happen…
Q: But since the Sichuan earthquake we’ve seen
some openness in Chinese media, greater access for the western media, and
ordinary people making sacrifices, giving donations. Hasn’t this shown another, positive side of China?
A: I feel the earthquake
awoke the Chinese people’s conscience – and in this time of suffering people have
shown sympathy for others. This is good,
it shows their hearts are alive… It’s a good start - but I don’t know how long it will last… And in our pain can we
not weep just for the [quake] victims, but also for those who died in 89? You can lower your flags to half mast for these
victims [of the earthquake] – but do you dare to lower them for all those who
have suffered in China?
Q: Your book was published first in English. Will
there be a Chinese edition – not in the mainland obviously?
A: The book will be published
in Chinese for the 20th anniversary of 1989 next year. I feel there should be something like this
to commemorate what happened.
Q: People might say that publishing at this time
you’re trying to cash in on a commercial opportunity?
A: No, it’s just to
commemorate what happened. And I don’t
think there is any commercial opportunity. I don’t think too many people will
be interested in the anniversary! But I
want to put this out there. And I
welcome people to make pirate copies to sell in China – I don’t want any money
– I just hope people will read it…
