Estudio de las fibras

Introduction

After the fall of the Gang of Four, Zunun Kadir was “rehabilitated” in 1979 and allowed to return from the seventeen years of exile at Yashlar Maidanı commune, near Aksu, in the Tarim basin255 (discussed in Chapter 1). During those years he had been subject to a double punishment. He was not only humiliated and tortured,256 but he was also

deprived of any opportunity to write. He returned as a sick and broken person, and he was not immediately restored to the relatively comfortable life he had enjoyed before his banishment. He and his family were left camping in the streets for ten days. Eventually they were allowed to live in a store room, before finally being given accommodation in the compound of the Writers’ Association in Urumqi.257

It was an experience that came as a clear warning – he was by no means unconditionally rehabilitated. He would continue to depend on the good will of the CCP government. He did not have a separate office to work in as he had had before, and could only write from his home. Every aspect of his life would be affected by the way he was viewed by officials of the government. In this situation, it is to be expected that Zunun, with his life-long experience of political conditions in Xinjiang, would become more cautious than ever in dealing with political material, and would concentrate instead on cultural and historical themes, while carefully hiding his references to those political themes that could attract official criticism.

Although Zunun may have lost some of his political idealism, he continued to try to use his writing to assert distinctive elements of Uyghur identity in contrast to the CCP vision of the Uyghur as a “minority” entity within greater China. This required him to use ambiguity in his writing so that the line that was acceptable to the CCP political

255

Zunun’s oral memoir, op.cit. 256

As discussed in Chapter 1, during “struggle” sessions Zunun was beaten, had his teeth knocked out, and was smeared with blue paint that blinded him in one eye.

257

Interview with Zunun’s wife Zileyhan, 12 June 1998 (Appendix 1), and also reported by Zhang Shirong (op.cit.), a member of the Xinjiang Writers’ Association. The Writers’ Association residential compound (Wen Lian Jiashu Yuan) is at 44 Yan’an Lu in Urumqi.

regime could be used to camouflage other messages that his Uyghur readers would understand indirectly.

The political environment in 1979 was one of change, but not one of certainty. In Zunun’s own words 1979 was a year in which “our great Party corrected the mistakes of the Cultural Revolution. Our family of eight came back to Urumqi.”258

The

rehabilitation of intellectuals persecuted in the Cultural Revolution was taking place all over the PRC, but after such persecution it was not easy for the intellectuals to resume their former life, or to gauge readily how much freedom they would now have to express their views. While the “excesses of the Cultural Revolution” were being officially criticised, it was not clear how far non-Han writers might be able to go in articulating their separate cultural identity and dissatisfaction with CCP policies. There was certainly no relaxation in the CCP’s hostility to anything that could be interpreted as “harming the unity of nationalities” or “encouraging splittism”.

Zunun was a writer who had supported socialism, but by the time he was facing the new climate of the 1980s, with a changed political and economic policy environment, he observed society with the personal experience of having spent seventeen years in a labour camp, and of being personally subject to the “proletarian dictatorship”. This seems to have given him a different perspective on the socialist idealism that he had earlier maintained. Although his earlier life had shown him much concerning the dangers of confrontation with authority, his life working within the CCP system emphasized his dilemma of submitting to authority in order to survive, while at the same time attempting to maintain his intellectual integrity. This necessitated employing subtle means to express his criticisms. In such a complex socio-political environment, Zunun’s dilemma was common to many Uyghurs who shared his position, and who sought to express their inner voice or the “truth” about their condition and their culture. Zunun’s life-long experience of the danger of being labelled a “splittist” or “nationalist” would have given him good reason to be cautious.

258

Zunun Kadir’s interest in reviving Uyghur culture may be seen in the context of the changed Chinese political climate of the 1980s. Since the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, there had been a gradual loosening of restraints on public debate. The use of historical analogy as a form of political criticism is a tradition in China at least as old as Confucius. Within months of Mao’s death and the coup against the “Gang of Four”, the official mass media itself was “dressing up contemporary politics in the clothes of the past”. For example, Mao’s widow Jiang Qing was portrayed as a modern counterpart to Empress Lu, who had a place in Chinese folklore as a usurper of imperial power during the Han dynasty.259

In December 1978, Deng Xiaoping gave a speech to a preparatory meeting for the 11th Party Congress entitled “Liberate Thinking, Seek Truth from Facts, and Unite and look to the Future”.260 By the early to mid-1980s, the then Party Secretary Hu Yaobang advocated new cultural and political policies that would allow a higher degree of historical reassessment than any other leader at the time, creating an

atmosphere that allowed the publishing of many works that would previously have been suppressed. From 1978 there was also a growing literary output of the so-called “scar literature” (“literature of the wounded”) that expressed resentment, anger and sadness about the sufferings of the preceding period261 - in particular the grievances of

intellectuals and young people who had been compelled to live in rural exile. At the same time, however, there was a counter-current of reasserting party control, which began with suppressing direct political comment (particularly the “Democracy Wall” movement in 1979) and later through gradual tightening of control on publishing that “curbed the trend of excessively negative exposure and crushed the semi-underground democracy movement”.262

In Xinjiang, the early 1980s saw some attempts to implement a more liberal policy toward minority cultures, for example by permitting more expression of culture and history, and more formal practice of Islamic religion (though under strictly controlled conditions). However, it also was a time of renewed economic activity, including encouragement of foreign joint ventures for the exploitation of Xinjiang’s mineral

259

Jonathan Unger, op.cit., p.4. 260

Speech to the closing session of the monthly work meeting held in preparation for the 3rd Plenum of the 11th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party : Geremie Barmé in Unger (ed), op.cit., p.261. 261

Ibid, p.267. 262

Jeffrey C Kinkley (ed), After Mao: Chinese Literaure and Society 1978-1981, Harvard University Press, 1985, p.188.

and petroleum resources. These economic programs were accompanied by accelerated transmigration of Han people into Xinjiang, and therefore increased tension between Han and Uyghur as the majority of economic benefits were seen to be taken up by incoming Han migrants. There were a series of violent uprisings,263

which resulted in the Han authorities bringing in more severe public security measures designed to suppress nationalistic expression or activity. This was the environment in which Zunun’s dilemma (that is, his attempts to balance his social ideals and national identity with political realities) would find expression again throughout the last phase of his creative life.

Within this context, Uyghur writers such as Zunun might have enjoyed some degree of freedom to write on Uyghur historical content, but they could never ignore the special danger of being labelled as “splittist” or “nationalist” if their writings offended official views regarding the “national unity” of the PRC. Their situation therefore was not the same as that of Han intellectuals. During this period of the “Four Modernisations” and early Dengist economic reforms, the Chinese government was encouraging the Chinese to be ambitious, engage in the world of business enterprises, and take on management responsibilities for the development of all China. However, the scope for Uyghur intellectuals was more limited. They were encouraged to promote certain aspects of Uyghur life and culture that were seen as “exotic”, but not those which would threaten the Chinese view of the Uyghur place within China. Thus certain kinds of Uyghur cultural symbol could be promoted, but only those that would promote images of Uyghur culture which would pigeonhole Uyghurs as a primitive, Islamic

fundamentalist, or otherwise backward-looking group who needed the direction of the Chinese state in order to improve their economic and social status. Views of a

progressive Uyghur future were liable to be

263

In Kashgar, 30th October 1980, there was a violent demonstration of up to 30,000 Uyghurs protesting against the beating to death of a Uyghur youth by Han. In January 1981 in Karghilik and in May 1981 in Peyzivat there were demonstrations against Han domination, where the sayings from the Koran were taken as slogans (Ablikim Iltebir Baki, Shehitler Shejeresi [a Record of the Martyrs], Dogu Turkistan Dayanişma derneği Yayinları [East Turkistan Solidarity Association Publishing], Istanbul, 1998, p.62.)

considered subversive.264 Chinese policies had the effect that in all situations there would be conditions that favoured Han Chinese opportunities in Xinjiang, and that placed Uyghurs at a disadvantage no matter what course of action they might choose.265

While progressive Uyghurs might risk being considered subversive, the Chinese policies toward minority nationalities generally favour an image of the minority nationalities as culturally backward, while benefiting from the economic progress provided by China. This essentially colonialist attitude is supported in such cultural expressions as the depiction of conservative Islamic dress codes, such as one can see in Chinese tourist brochures and magazines about Xinjiang.266

These depictions select the minority of women who choose to wear the thick veil, and emphasize the “otherness” of Uyghur people, not just from Chinese, but also from the Western point of view which sees Islam as alien. This is consistent with a process that Louisa Schein and others have identified as “internal orientalisation”. Schein describes this as “a set of practices that occur within China, and that, in this case, refers to the fascination of more cosmopolitan Chinese with the “exotic” minority cultures in an array of polychromatic and titillating forms”.267 This “orientalisation” of Uyghurs, in the name of cultural revival, on the one hand portrays Uyghurs as exhibits for tourist purposes rather than an intelligent, capable and cultured people who look West more than they look to China. On the other hand, the Chinese authorities, in encouraging controlled aspects of conservative cultural revival, may gain support from the most conservative forces in Uyghur society, who may assist them in suppressing or obstructing modern social and cultural developments.

264

In the course of field research I was told of an incident exemplifying this problem. The writer Ehtem Omer was criticised and placed under supervision after he published an article in the Xinjiang Ayallari

Journali [Xinjiang Women’s Journal] which advocated the importance of educating women so as to

provide a strong basis for educating future generations. Ehtem Omer related social problems in Xinjiang to the comparative lack of education given to girls. In official criticism, the writer was accused of mounting a hidden attack on the state system. The article was reproduced in Ittipak no.1(32), the Uyghur newspaper published in Bishkek, Kyrgyzistan, 1 January 1998, p.3.

265

For example, promotion of cultural icons such as the mukam music as uniquely Uyghur, while setting up a basis for Uyghur national cultural self esteem, could also create competitiveness between Uyghur and the other Central Asian Turkic nations, and could contribute to undermining development of common feeling between these nationalities.

266

Examples are the illustrations on the back covers of Zhongguo Xibu Wenxue [The Literature of China’s West], 1986, no.6 and 1988, no 2.

267

Such Chinese policy may have an unintended effect, in that Uyghur intellectuals may be encouraged to find ways to promote Uyghur cultural traditions and preserve their

distinct identity from the Chinese, while proceeding carefully so as not to antagonise the Chinese government. I consider that Zunun Kadir was in this position, and the results are seen in his writing, particularly his works of the 1980s that are discussed in this chapter.

Under the CCP’s encouragement to create and renovate cultural identity, Zunun Kadir had some opportunities to emphasize the differences between Han and Uyghur

identities. This provided another approach to resolving his continuing dilemma between his roles as a CCP functionary and his calling as a Uyghur writer. A device that enabled him to maintain a balance between these roles was the use of ambiguous references which would pass political scrutiny, and also, when read in specific Uyghur cultural context, offered references to Uyghur identity or viewpoint that would be appreciated by the Uyghur reader. Folklore and other cultural references often provided the imagery that could be used in this way. Some of his stories are based on popular cultural

themes, which provide both a distinctive background, and also an appropriate working class setting. Zunun’s stories of this kind contain motives that can be seen in terms of Louisa Schien’s concept of “internal orientalisation”, but this does not undermine their purpose of reinforcing Uyghur identity. Zunun did not appear to endorse reactionary or backward cultural positions, but seems to have seen an opportunity to use official Chinese policies to bolster Uyghur identity as much as possible. Zunun’s personal experience and disappointment with politics seems to have changed some of his earlier views about elements of his culture that could seem superstitious and backward. In his 1980s writings, some such traditional practices are treated with dignity. Zunun may have felt that Uyghur culture survived because of a certain spiritual energy, provided by these cultural traditions and links, that generates common ethos and inspiration.

It is notable that throughout Zunun’s writings of the 1980s there is a focus on the past, rather than the future. His drive, from the 1940s onward, to promote social progress and political modernisation seems to have been set aside, and he now seems to see his responsibility as a writer to be in the preservation of a culture that is under threat. This takes place at a time when, in mainstream Chinese writing, there was considerable

freedom to write about social, political and economic modernisation (as well as the cultural themes of regretting lost traditions, reviving folk culture and so on). Why is this not the case with Zunun? The answer may be found in the different status of

“minority” nationalities and the limitations placed upon their political activity, including writing. There could be risks for any writer in China who dealt with democratic themes, but when any suggestion of self-determination for minorities was still considered to be treasonous (“splittist”), what credible discussion could be held on democracy in Xinjiang? The literary policies of the time were always directed towards limiting “minority” freedoms to activity that would serve the greater objective, that is

“preserving the Unity of the Motherland, the ways and means of establishing national unity and making China once again a rich and powerful country.”268 In these

circumstances, a writer such as Zunun was pushed in the direction of memoir and cultural preservation, rather than progressive political writing. This provided an opportunity to write, through the medium of folk tale, recollection and legend, about many elements of Uyghur culture that had been hidden from publication for some decades.

After his return from labour camp, he published a series of stories set in earlier periods of his lifetime. As he said himself, he drew creatively on his own experience. His oral memoir, recorded shortly before he left Xinjiang for the last time on his journey to Kazakistan, concludes with the statement: “Until the end of my life, I would like to continue my work as a creative writer, in order to leave works to my people”.269

In fact, Zunun was very productive in the 1980s. The major works of this period were his collaboration on the film script for “Gerip and Senem” (completed 1981), and the publication of a collection of short pieces, “Recollections” [Hatireler]. Zunun’s oral memoir, taped near the end of his life, refers to his having published seventeen such recollections, and to be working on the “second and third volumes”. The volume published in 1991 after his death includes recollections written up to the time of his death. Zunun also refers to his work in the 1980s as including “some legends, derived

268

Samuel S Kim, China in and out of a changing world, Centre for International Studies World Order Study Program Occasional Paper no.21, Princeton University 1991, p.44.

269

from classical legends and stories, and a further ten stories that I collected from Kyrgyz and prepared for publication. I collected 2000 riddles together with Kadir Mehmet.” 270

A common element of these works of the 1980s is that they all refer to the past, either realistic or legendary. Zunun seems to have consciously avoided contemporary settings and references, which might be more politically dangerous, preferring instead to make his points through literary analogy and metaphor, and by drawing upon historical allusions. In this way he hoped to secure approval for publication of works that would have meaning for his own people, as he had stated in the final words of his oral memoir quoted above. To achieve this, he would have to maintain his position as a publishable writer under the political supervision that still prevailed in Xinjiang.

This chapter will focus in particular on four works – the epic story of “Gerip and

Senem” (opera and film scripts), and three different examples of the works published in the volume “Recollections”: “Hessen”; “On the Journey”; and “The Road in Quest of Knowledge”.

Gerip and Senem

Zunun’s work on this epic story is of special interest, because it exists in three forms that show various stages of development. The first form is an opera libretto, on which