The question of whether or not elders have the authority to arrange their children’s marriage became a topic that attracted broad public attention and debate in the pre-May
Fourth era. Funü zazhi 妇女杂志[The Ladies’ Journal], which was first published by the
Commercial Press in Shanghai in January 1915, became one major forum that hosted such marriage debates.32
Before the New Culturalists’ crusade against tradition was fully deployed, public opinion on marriage reform was dominated by a mixture of expectation for China’s quick
modernization and anxiety over the disorder caused by a too rapid social transformation. For example, at the commencement of the Henan Women’s Normal School in 1915, the
minister of Education Shi Bao’an史宝安, delivered a public defense of the tradition of
parental authority arranging marriages for their children. He utilized the Confucian reverence for elders, arguing that the senior generation was more socialized and
experienced in the matter of marriage than the younger one. He argued that a life partner arranged by parent(s) must be better than a partner arranged by oneself, due to the fact
31 “Fengjian”封建 or feudal originally refers to the political ideology of the Zhou Dynasty of ancient China; literally
translated it means “decentralized system of government”. In the Marxist historiographical interpretation of Chinese history in China, this term has popularly been used to describe the society from Zhou to Qing, but recent scholarship has suggested that fengjian lacks some of the fundamental aspects in comparison to European feudalism. Since the end of the dynastic rule in China, the term “fengjian” was more often used in a negative way, similar to “traditional” in English. For more references, see Q. Edward Wang, “Between Marxism and Nationalism: Chinese historiography and the Soviet influence, 1949-1963”, Journal of Contemporary China, volume 9, issue 23(2000): 95 – 111.
32
As the most successful publishing house in China, the Commercial Press had bookstores in twenty-eight Chinese cities, as well as in Hong Kong, Macao, and in Singapore. The Ladies’ Journal was thus able to reach women across a wide geographical area, unlike most women’s magazines, whose influence was limited by constraints in
distribution and finance. Because women’s literacy was still a status symbol in the 1910s, the journal naturally targeted women of the middle and upper classes. Female teachers and students contributed to its forums and columns. But most of the articles were written by men, including the editor in chief, Wang Yunzhang王蕴章, and many of its readers were men. For a discussion of the background of The Ladies’ Journal, see Jacqueline Nivard, “Women and the Women’s Press,” in Republican China 10, no. 1b (November 1984), 37-55.
that people in love are generally short-sighted and blind to the negative aspects of their mates, whereas parents would be more considerate and far-sighted in their choice, owing to their natural love for their children. Therefore, Shi concluded “it is impossible that the
marriage of our country's men and women could not be decided by their family heads [家
长jiazhang].”33 Further, Shi attributed the fact that there were many unhappy couples in China to the early marriage custom and public distaste for divorce. The problem for China, according to Shi, was how to dissolve the marriage or engagement of mismatched couples, rather than how to deprive parents of their marriage decision-making authority. The solution, he argued, was to regulate people’s marriage (or engagement) age and to prolong the waiting period between the engagement and the wedding. Like the cautious late-Qing reformers, Shi suggested a gradual social reform process: “If we acted with undue haste,” Shi warned, “we would meet greater resistance. It is necessary to know that haste will make waste.” 34
Along with the rise of the New Culture Movement after 1915, the readers of Funü zazhi
read about a more comprehensive and controversial debate over how to properly combine the free-choice marriage practice with the traditional parental arrangement. The
consensus opinion that arose from such discussions was that young people should be given the right and freedom to choose their own lovers, but for the final marriage decision they should gain the consent of their parents. This theory was exemplified by
two articles in 1917: “Jiehun gailiang shuo”结婚改良说 [Discussion on Marriage
Reform] by Qu Li趋礼35, and “Lun hunzhi”论婚制 [Discussion on Marriage System] by
Ding Fengjia of Wujiang吴江丁逢甲.36
Both articles were published in the “Shelun” 社论[Social discussion] column, which
hosted discussions based on the hottest social problems from the front page of the Funü
zazhi. Both Qu and Ding agreed that the traditional arranged marriage pattern was
33
Shi Bao’an , “Henan nüzi shifan xuexiao biye xunci” 河南女子师范学校毕业训词[Speech on the commencement of Henan Women’s Normal School],Funü zazhi, no.1 (1915): 1-9, 4.
34 Ibid., 9. 35
Qu Li, “Jiehun gailiang shuo” [Discussion on Marriage Reform], Funü zazhi, no.5 (1917): 2-9.
36
obsolete and did not fit in the social context of a Republican China that complimented individual rights and personal freedoms. Based on the observation that mutual feelings of love were often absent in the arranged couple, the critics admitted that free love and pre- marital communication were necessary and important elements for happy marriages. Ding in particular called for more public attention to be given to the reform of the marriage system than to that of the political or educational institutions. From the perspective of national salvation, he claimed “people trapped in unhappy or unhealthy marriages are often depressed and weak, incapable of producing healthy offspring. This posed great dangers to the Chinese race…Therefore, Chinese marriage should be reformed ahead of the political system and education, otherwise, the root of the Chinese nation would gradually deteriorate, and then there would be no hope for China to resurrect itself.”37
Considering China’s conservative social realities, however, both Qu and Ding believed that the family’s supervision and opinion were still necessary factors to consider whenever contemplating a marriage match. Qu claimed that the acquisition of parental approval for one’s own love choice was in fact not only in order to show respect to one’s parents, but also to pay deference to love. 38 Ding believed that true love only existed between two people who were matched on specific grounds such as “blood and gene, family background, potential for future development, personalities, age and
thoughts…[and] the best way of getting married is to select the marriage subject by the free will of two parties, but the final decision of marriage should be left to the parents after a careful examination on the subject (with the criteria given above).”39
In their search for accommodation between the two extremes of parental consent and children’s free choice, Qu Li and Ding Fengjia demonstrated typical Confucian thinking
by resorting to “zhongyong zhidao”中庸之道 [the doctrine of mean], or the middle
course. Zhongyong中庸comprises the elements of “equilibrium” [zhong] and
“normality” [yong]. The translation of these two words as the Mean suggests the
37Ding, 2. 38 Qu,6. 39 Ding, 8.
fundamental moral ideas of moderation, balance and suitability.40 In the 20th century, this policy was adapted by various reformers and scholars in order to find a middle point in the intersectional area between Chinese tradition and foreign culture, and henceforth to concoct conciliations in order to reach equilibrium and harmony.41
New mate-selection criteria were made in accordance with these new marriage politics.
In his 1918 “Zefu zhi yanjiu”择夫之研究[Studies on Husband Selection], Wei
Shouyong魏寿镛provided women with a criteria list for a potential husband that
included nine conditions: 42
1. Family background [mendi], appearance, intelligence and education.
2. Age 3. Profession 4. Property 5. Family members 6. Physical health 7. Mental health
8. Daily living habits
9. Temper
With regards to age, Wei believed the best age for marriage was from 20 to 28, with the man being two or three years older than the woman. This list was a combination of old and new marriage politics: it juxtaposed individual qualities such as appearance,
intelligence and education with traditional conception of mendi [family background] as
being of the first importance; postponed marriage age to an appropriately 'modern' standard; emphasized economic potential; stressed the role of an individual’s health for the sake of family line continuation; and required matched personality traits such as habits and temperament. Although more personal interests were added into the selection criteria, love was seldom evaluated as a crucial element in making a good match. On the contrary, love was described as more like an unstable emotion that might easily lead to wrongdoing. Parental supervision and examination of potential matches were thus invited in expectation that they would neutralize any harm caused by impulsive love emotions.
40
Wm Theodore DeBary and Irene Bloom, eds., Sources of Chinese Tradition: From Earliest Times to 1600 (New York, Columbia University Press, 1999), 333-339.
41
Sun Shiming孙实明, “Lun Kong Meng de Zhongyong zhidao” 论孔孟的中庸之道[Discussion on Confucius and Mencius’ Doctrine of the Mean], Lilun Tantao, no.4 (1994):87-89, 88.
42
This is the other side of the “doctrine of mean”, which demands that an individual constrain his/her self and deny personal feelings for the sake of remaining in a state of moderation.43
The contributors of these moderate opinions met radical critiques from anti-arranged
marriage crusaders. Lu Qiuxin 陆秋心, the female chief editor of Xin Funü新妇女[New
Women] and a devoted Marxist, questioned their loyalty to democratic principles. She argued that the so-called consensual arranged marriage was in actuality parallel in
political terms to the Constitutional monarchy system, which had proved to be a failure in
China.44 Lu compared three marriage systems with three political systems in order to
illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of each. She suggested that a marriage completely arranged by the parents without the consent of the children was analogous to a monarchy, under which the masses were largely deprived of the right to speak; in the same manner, she noted that a marriage arranged by the parents with the consent of the children was parallel to the constitutional monarchy system, under which people’s freedoms were limited and under the control of authorities; in an ostensibly democratic state, such as the new Republic of China, Lu concluded, it was essential to allow free marriage between a man and a woman without any interference from a third party.