When the root-seeking novels return to traditional culture, they show a preference for social life forms with original features and exotic feelings. The appearance of this primitive complex is not only related to the writer's own reasons, but also to the influence of foreign literature and the logical result of literature's own development. Root-seeking novels show three tendencies of criticizing, recognizing or both primitive and semi-primitive cultures in specific works.
Looking at the overall trend of root-seeking novels, it is found that when root-seeking novels return to the traditional culture of China, many writers invariably show their preference for those social life forms with original features and exotic atmosphere. For example, Zheng Wanlong's series of novels in a Foreign Land describe the dog department of the savage Jurchen in Heilongjiang, Han Shaogong's Daddy and Daddy, and Wang Anyi's Little Bag Zhuang, which describe the lives of people in remote areas and isolated cottages full of mystery, blending a lot of unrealistic and surreal contents such as myths, legends, unofficial history and sacrifices. In addition, there are Ma Si, bonfires and snowstorms in Houguere's works, Mongolian grasslands in Zhang Chengzhi's works, old sea bumpers in Deng Gang's charming sea, totems of primitive life in salt pillars and so on. In a word, these primitive or semi-primitive social life forms are the subject areas that root-seeking writers are good at, which not only constitute the distinctive features of root-seeking novels, but also become a problem that should be seriously considered. First of all, since the 1980s, there has been a huge upsurge of cultural discussion in China academic circles, and literature, as the carrier of culture, will inevitably be influenced by cultural discussion, leading to the trend of cultural root-seeking in the literary field. Root-seeking writers believe that "literature has roots, and the roots of literature should be deeply rooted in the soil of national traditional culture." The roots are not deep, and the leaves are difficult to flourish. "
On the other hand, the "root-seeker" also touched the root of culture. For example, Chen's White Deer Plain. Although Chen intends to reflect on the dross in traditional culture. However, due to his nostalgia and infatuation with traditional culture, it is doomed that he will sincerely explore the "roots" of the nation today. His description of Bai Jiaxuan's contradictory personality reflects his tendency of "seeking roots". He hopes to find that tough personality and Confucian traditional moral concept and inject a stimulant into the new society. However, the irreconcilable contradiction between the high standard of traditional morality and human nature is fully revealed in Bai Jiaxuan. Is our image of Baijiaxuan positive or negative? To affirm Bai Jiaxuan's tenacious personality charm, we must admit his "pseudo" legitimacy, and affirm his moral requirement is to deny his humanity, which is bound to be "pseudo" and Lu Zilin, that is, to advocate finding the dark roots in traditional culture. The antinomy dilemma encountered in the process of "seeking roots" is enough to give a blow to the "seeking roots". They are at a loss themselves. Obviously, "root seekers" need to make major adjustments to the "roots" they are looking for. Only in this way can we grasp the essence of the "root" of national culture from a metaphysical height.
If you look at the "root-seeking" novels without genre significance. In the whole impetuous contemporary literature, they can indeed be called "fine works". On the one hand, they stand out from contemporary novels in the state of "aphasia". It broadens the subject matter that is not very wide, and indirectly gives people confidence, even if this confidence has not been rationally demonstrated, it is difficult to establish. In addition, some artistic images and phonetic tension they created can also be said to be generals in the dwarf, which can be said to be a small climax of contemporary literature, especially in the novel world. Without diachronic analysis and ignoring the relentless washing of time, it is undoubtedly vital to put it in contemporary China literature. There are already many related arguments, so I won't go into details. Obviously, however, the achievements of contemporary China literature can hardly be compared with the world literature.
However, even so, we don't pursue the value of root-seeking literature as a literary genre, and the hard imitation mentioned above by root-seekers is indeed a serious harm to their literary creation itself. The value of literature lies in its uniqueness. Once someone in front has used a certain technique, the people behind will consciously avoid it. Otherwise, the first person to write Sister Lin is of course an artistic creation, but the person who follows can only be an efficient teacher and a toddler in Handan. If there is any reason or excuse for the similarity between Tashi Dawa's novels and One Hundred Years of Solitude, it is that the two nations are similar in culture and even psychological structure. Then in the Han nationality whose regional culture and national psychology are very different from those in Latin America, this imitation is very naive! For example, Red Sorghum imitates the novel's simple defamiliarization and its mysterious setting of the environmental atmosphere by imitating its narrative way of breaking time and space. There always seems to be a barrier around the place described in Guri Drum. People go back when they reach a certain limit. Birds fly to a certain limit and then turn back. Even the sun and the moon are the same. It goes round and round, everything goes round and round, and nothing new comes in ... "People seem to be kept in the dark and turn a deaf ear to science. This insensitive living condition is a replica of Macondo Town in Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude, and it is still "poor", "lonely" and "unchanged for a hundred years". People are constantly recalling the past, from now to the future and back to the past, everything is going back and forth. The novel is not so much a reference as a copy of the technique of "turning reality into fantasy without losing truth". Even if the operation of "transplantation" is brilliant, it will be guilty after all. The difference between the two nations is so great that deliberate imitation in literature is always disgusting. Nationality is an important factor for literature and art to go global. Root-seeking novelists seem to keep this in mind, but they often unconsciously copy western literature, especially Latin American magic realism, in their creative practice. People who don't understand see: Hey, why are the national cultures of China all printed with the imprint of Latin America? Are they homologous? Or did powerful birds bring the seeds of culture to the other side of the ocean?
There is no need to say that it is against their constant "quotation" or "reference". But this undigested "reference" of "what to eat and what to pull" can only be imitation. "The more I wrote, the more I looked like a master, and later I was too lazy to go to Taskmaster", so I still narcissistically copied my successful works. The "root-seeking" novelists add embellishment to contemporary China literature with their creative practice, and at the same time add a touch of black to this era: What an uncreative and erratic era! Xizhi Guo said: "This is an impulse to imitate. The explosion of magic literature in Latin America has made root seekers feel that they have similar' national conditions'. A deeper mentality also has a mutation under long-term lock-in. This mentality is drawn by the concept of' nation is the world' and is eager to be recognized by the outside world, so-called' going to the world'. " They have a poor foundation and have no intention of strengthening their theoretical literacy. They can't really think about "looking for national things" and create good works, let alone rush to the world.
In a word, the advocates and practitioners of "root-seeking" literature are offside and confused in theory and creative practice because of their misunderstanding of the cultural fault zone, their inability to digest and absorb, and, more importantly, their vague positioning of their own values and their impetuousness that they are eager to surpass but cannot surpass. As an influential school in theory and creation, "root-seeking" literature is obviously not worthy of the name, and it has not played its due role as a literary school. At the same time, as a member of the chaotic contemporary literature group, it also has its inevitable chronic diseases. In this way, "root-seeking" literature can only be a passer-by in literature. This is undoubtedly a reminder for China literature, which is eager to go global. Today is not nostalgia or nothing to say. I hope that philosophers can treat the gap between China literature and world literature with a normal mind.