The Letters of Eileen Chang - Part 3

The Chinese writer Eileen Chang (張愛玲, also known as Zhang Ai-ling) passed away in September, 1995.  In 2004, Crown Press published a previously unknown novel of hers.

The title of the novel in Chinese is: 《同學少年都不賤》.  There is presently no English translation even for the title.  It is not easy to come up with a translation because the title is based upon a variation on a poem by Du Fu (杜甫):

《秋興》其三

千家山郭靜朝暉，日日江樓坐翠微。
信宿漁人還泛泛，清秋燕子故飛飛。
匡衡抗疏功名薄，劉向傳經心事違。
同學少年多不賤，五陵衣馬自輕肥。

The story plot revolved around the lives of two women who first knew each other in a secondary school run by missionaries in Shanghai, where they got along fantastically.  After they got married, one of them went to Washington DC to become an interpreter while another took her daughter to live in France.  They met again and they recalled the fun things in their past and they gossiped about whatever to their classmates.  Then they parted ways again.  That is the basic plot.  Perhaps the novel could be simply titled <The Classmates> for simplicity.

When this previously unknown novel was published nine years after her death, there might been more discussions about the circumstances around the publication than about the literary merits of the novel itself.

According to the foreword written by the Crown Press editor, when professor Stephen C. Soong (宋淇) (who was the father of the blogger writing this essay) was alive, he had forwarded certain manuscripts and possessions of Eileen Chang to Crown Press for safekeeping.  However, he did not mention to Crown Press that such a novel existed.  In Eileen Chang's private will to Stephen C. Soong and his wife Mae Fong Soong, there was no mention of this novel either.  After Stephen C. Soong passed away in 1996, Mae Fong Soong found the novel and forwarded it to the Crown Press office in Hong Kong.  When the Crown Press office in Hong Kong mailed the original manuscript to the Crown Press headquarters in Taipei, the post office lost it!  Fortunately, a photocopy had been made before the original manuscript was mailed as a precaution and that was how this novel came to be published eventually.  The twisted history was enough to arouse suspicion among some people whether this was a forgery.

The history of the writing of this novel is unknown given the Eileen Chang and Stephen C. Soong are both deceased and Mae Fong Soong has no knowledge.  But United Daily News Supplement editor Su Weizhen (蘇偉貞) pointed out that in Professor C.T. Hsia's collection of letters from Eileen Chang (see the monthly magazine United Literature, Volume 14, Issue 9), the letter from Eileen Chang dated August 20, 1978 mentioned this manuscript thus:

《同學少年都不賤》這部小說除了外界的阻力，我一寄出就發現它本身毛病很大，已經擱開了。

(in translation)  Apart from the outside pressures on the novel <The Classmates 同學少年都不賤>, I also realized that it is seriously flawed right after I mailed it out.  Therefore, it has been put aside. 

This had been the sole primary reference so far on this matter.

The Eileen Chang specialist Chen Zishan (陳子善) wrote about the story around the publication of the novel (Wen Wei Po via Xinhua Net).  The novel began with a mention of US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, so Chen believed that it must have been written somewhere after 1973 (when Henry Kissinger became Secretary of State) and before 1978 (because the August 1978 letter to C.T. Hsia referred to the mailed manuscript).

Chen Zishan pointed out that there are two mysteries in the aforementioned quotation from the letter.

Mystery #1: What were those outside pressures?  

Mystery #2: To whom was the manuscript mailed?

On mystery #1, there have been all sorts of speculations about the 'outside pressures.'  But those are speculations and nothing more, because there is no primary evidence to support any of them.  There is no point for me to repeat those speculations.  

On mystery #2, Chen Zishan believed that it was obviously sent to Stephen C. Soong for his opinion.  Chen wrote: "It is well known that since the 1950's, many of Eileen Chang's works were sent to Stephen C. Soong, who acted as the gatekeeper and arranged for them to be published.  Perhaps Stephen C. Soong had a different view of this novel and believed that 'it is seriously flawed'?  This may explain why the manuscript of this novel stayed in the hands of Stephen C. Soong.  But this is just my bold hypothesis, and the relevant documentary evidence remains to be discovered."

Where in the world is that relevant documentary evidence going to come from?  How about the archive of the correspondence between Eileen Chang and Stephen C. Soong/Mae Fong Soong?  I happen to be in charge presently.  The following information was discovered by me from a cursory scan of the archive.

In a letter from Stephen C. Soong to Eileen Chang dated July 19, 1978 (or about one month before the aforementioned letter from Eileen Chang to C.T. Hsia):

[in translation]

Please do not publish <The Classmates 同學少年都不賤>.  There are many intellectuals in Taiwan nowadays who adulate mainland China.  They may not dare to express their positions openly, but they will do everything to attack anti-Communist writers by every possible means.  You are the number one anti-Communist writer in Free China and you will naturally be the target.  The good thing is that you have other excellent works and there are academic scholars such as C.T. Hsia as well as many writers (the most active one is Zhu Xining 朱西寧) who support you.  Recently, someone went through all the sentences that have erotic overtones (and they are being taken out of context) from more than twenty years of Yu Guangzhong (余光中)'s poetry and connected them together for a piece entitled "A poet like this" in order to humiliate Yu as a "pornographic" writer.  You are actually very innocent, but if people use the same methods against you, it will be very bad for you.  At the same time, this novel is not much better than the previous two.  After this gets published, it will be tough on your supporters.  Recently, a magazine publicly criticized (Dick) McCarthy and said that the Iowa Writers Training Workshop students such as Yu Guangzhong (余光中), Bai Xianyong (白先勇), Wang Wenxing (王文興) and others were all CIA agents.  Therefore, you should not mention McCarthy and the saga related to your novel Naked Earth.

Dick McCarthy was the United States Information Service boss of Eileen Chang when she was doing translation in Hong Kong.  He was also quite helpful to her over the years with recommendations and leads.  Each Christmas, Eileen Chang wrote a letter to Dick McCarthy.  The following was dated December 27 (either 1977 or 1978 -- Eileen Chang wrote down the month and day of each letter, but never the year!), and it was copied to Stephen C. Soong.  This was typewritten by Eileen Chang herself.

The short story mentioned here is <Lust, Caution 《色,戒》>, currently being made into a movie by director Ang Lee of <Brokeback Mountain> fame and scheduled to be the opening film at the Venice Film Festival later this year.  When that movie gets exhibited, there is bound to be yet another round of Internet condemnation about "glorifying traitors."

Did Eileen Chang and Stephen C. Soong sound paranoid about the 'outside pressures' coming from the Chinese Communists and their fellow travelers?  In that context, you have to also remember that the novel <The Classmates 同學少年都不賤> contained references to Agnes Smedley, the first atomic bomb test in China, etc.  That means nothing nowadays, but it meant a lot under martial law in Taiwan back then.  Furthermore, it was also a different atmosphere and relationship among the writers of that era.  One of the key figures at the time was Chen Jo-Hsi (also Chen Roxi) who grew up in Taiwan, studied in the United States, went to Nanjing (China) in 1966 and stayed seven years before leaving to write The Execution of Mayor Yin and Other Stories from the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution to great critical acclaim (see review in TIME) as well as denunciation for betrayal to the cause of socialism.  Chen Jo-shi managed to gain moral superiority because she spent seven years in China during the worst of times while her most vitriolic critics were armchair critics living comfortably in Taiwan, Hong Kong or the United States.  In today's climate, <The Classmates 同學少年都不賤> actually seems quaint and outdated.  But it is hard to say what the reaction would have been in 1978 given the prevailing atmosphere at the time.  It is not fair for us to second-guess the judgments of Eileen Chang and Stephen C. Soong decades later.

As I said at the beginning, I only conducted a cursory search.  The case could be made more solid if I can locate Eileen Chang's response to that letter from Stephen C. Soong.  That may take some time to accomplish, but a good start has been made towards solving the mysteries listed by Chen Zishan.

Here is another (undated) letter from Eileen Chang about an earlier experience in Hong Kong.  It explains why some intellectuals may prefer to stay away from politics altogether.

[in translation]

This reminds me of the time when I just came back from mainland China and I went back to Hong Kong University.  There was a female dormitory supervisor who was Chinese and who chatted with me often.  I thought that it was because we were about the same age.  She looked at least prettier than me and she obviously spoke better English.  She kept probing me about my relation with the old professor who was my guarantor to come to Hong Kong.  When she was certain that there was no connection, she dropped me.

Then I went for a trip to Japan and came back.  The Hong Kong police ran an investigation on me and they went to ask questions about me at the Hong Kong University female student dormitory.  The dormitory supervisor said that I was a suspected Communist spy.  Although I did not get along with people and I have taken a bumpy road over the years, I have never met anyone like that.

关于《同学少年都不贱》     陈子善

  2001年7月，盛夏时节，我从波士顿飞到洛杉矶。我是应美国南加州大学东亚系主任张错教授之请去作短暂访问的，在该系有一场小范围的学术演讲。但我此行还有一个更为重要的私人目的，那就是踏访张爱玲故居，寻找张爱玲当年在洛杉矶留下的足迹。
  
  张爱玲1995年9月中秋节前夕在洛杉矶悄然告别人世，时光飞逝，倏忽六年过去了，张爱玲故居是否有新房客入住？故居前的几株绿树也该长高了吧？张爱玲常在寄信发传真的小店还在营业否？有关张爱玲的一切的一切，都是我亟想知道的。然而见到张错教授后，又得知南加大东方图书馆有“张爱玲资料特藏”，很值得一看。于是由张错教授热情引见，在东方图书馆负责人浦丽琳女士特别安排下，我查阅了尚未对外开放的“张爱玲资料特藏”。当打开四大纸盒特藏资料的一刹那，我简直不敢相信自己的眼睛。
  
  事情必须追溯到四年之前。1997年10月，为纪念张爱玲逝世二周年，南加州大学东方图书馆举办了 “张爱玲遗作手稿特展”。“特展”取得了很大成功，原因之一就是得到了台湾皇冠出版社的鼎力支持，提供了不少张爱玲作品手稿复印件，包括英译《海上花列传》手稿、英文《少帅传奇》手稿（均为打字稿）、《对照记》和散文《乱世纪二三事》（即《惘然记》）、《“嗄？”？》、《草炉饼》、《笑纹》、《四十而不惑》、《一九八八至——？》手稿等等，琳琅满目，美不胜收。“特展”圆满结束后，这批手稿复印件就由南加大东方图书馆妥为保存。其中最为引人注目也最使我惊喜的就是中篇小说《同学少年都不贱》的手稿。
  
  《同学少年都不贱》写在由皇冠出版社为张爱玲特制的500格长形稿纸上，共 42页，钢笔竖写，字迹娟秀清晰，一气呵成，仅少数几处有删改。亲眼目睹张爱玲这部当时尚不为人所知的中篇手泽，我不禁感慨万端。作家创作，不像GDP，可以每年持续增长，精神生产有巅峰期，也就有沉寂期，这本属正常，更无可厚非。但长期以来一直有一种论调，认为张爱玲离开大陆后，她的写作就走进了死胡同，乏善可陈。其实，留在大陆的那些二三十年代的文坛大家名家，又有几人在五十年代以后写出了足以传世的作品，那又该作何解释呢？事实恰恰与人们的苛评相反，后期张爱玲仍坚持创作，仍致力于有所突破，正像她在《续集》一书（1988年2月台湾皇冠出版社初版）自序中所说的，她在“继续写下去”，“虽然也并没有停止过，近年来写得少，刊出后经常有人没看见，以为我搁笔了。”
  
  这部《同学少年都不贱》倒确实是张爱玲生前没有刊出的，个中原委，颇值探究。上个世纪七十年代中叶，是张爱玲小说创作的又一个喷发期，虽然已不像早年那么辉煌。她的好友宋淇（林以亮）在那篇写于1976年的名文《私语张爱玲》中就曾欣喜地透露“现在她又在专心创作，她的忠实读者和友好听见了这喜讯，辗转相告。”尽管宋淇预告的当时已在润饰的《小团圆》终于未能问世，《小团圆》手稿也至今下落不明，但两年之后，张爱玲还是拿出了《色，戒》、《浮花浪蕊》、《相见欢》等一系列新作。据张爱玲自己回忆，这几篇小说都在五十年代就已写出初稿，“此后屡经彻底改写”，才在1978年前后交付发表的。后来收入《惘然记》一书时又“还添改多处”，足见张爱玲创作态度的严谨，一丝不苟，也正应了她1978年8月20日致夏志清函中所作的自我解剖：“我是爱看人生，对文艺往往过苛。”
  
  从《同学少年都不贱》开首就提到基辛格（张作季辛吉）出任美国国务卿，应可推算这部中篇作于1973年至1978年之间，也就在上引同一封致夏志清的长信中，张爱玲第一次也是唯一的一次提到这部本该与《色，戒》、《浮浪花蕊》等同时面世的《同学少年都不贱》，她告诉夏志清：“《同学少年都不贱》这部小说除了外界的阻力，我一写出就发现它本身毛病很大，已经搁开了。”所谓“外界的阻力”具体有何指涉？已引起“张学”研究者的浓厚兴趣。拙见既然这部小说当时根本不为外界所知，“外界的阻力”无非是广义的泛指，而不是明确的特指，即外界对张爱玲期待甚高，当然也可能包括《色，戒》1978年1月发表后所引起的争议，以至张爱玲后来不得不再写《羊毛出在羊身上——谈〈色，戒〉》以为答辩。而“寄出”又寄往何处？显然是寄给宋淇以听取他的意见。众所周知，五十年代以降，张爱玲不少作品都是寄给宋淇，过目把关安排刊登。如此说来，也许宋淇对这部中篇也有不同看法，认为小说“毛病很大”？这样也就能解释为什么这部中篇的手稿后来一直由宋淇保管。但这只是我的大胆推测，还有待相关文献的发掘证实。
  
  不管怎样，《同学少年都不贱》袭用杜工部《秋兴八首》中“同学少年都不贱，五陵裘马自轻肥”之意，铺陈上海某所教会女中一个寝室四位女生尤其是赵珏和恩娟两位不同的生活经历和心理成长，以此揭示人生无常的沧桑悲凉，可谓别出心裁，意味深长。渗透小说的是张爱玲一贯的略带调侃的笔法，一贯的细腻入微的描绘，一贯的大起大落的时间跨度，一贯的前后呼应的情节结构。小说中对三四十年代教会女生性心理的露骨展示，对五六十年代海外知识分子人生选择的逼真刻画，在张爱玲以前的小说中都是从未出现过的。小说无疑带有某种程度的自传色彩，同时也巧妙地穿插了美国左派女记者史沫特莱、中国第一颗原子弹爆炸等情节，显示张爱玲力图开拓题材，在更广大的背景上反映风云变幻中小人物的日常生活，塑造女主人公的独特性格和命运，从而也就使小说具有了时代风尚史和心态史的意义。这应可视作张爱玲的可贵尝试。至于如何给这部中篇在张爱玲的小说创作史上恰当定位，读者自可见仁见智。
  
  如果我的推测可以成立，宋淇当年收到《同学少年都不贱》后，又遵张爱玲之意“搁开 ”，这一搁就是整整二十六年！在张爱玲飘然西去之后，宋淇或者是邝文美先生及时检出这部中篇手稿寄交皇冠出版社（从南加州大学东方图书馆1997年10月 “特展”时就得到这部中篇手稿复印件，不难判断宋、邝夫妇是在1997年1月至1997年8、9月间把手稿转交皇冠的），使这部珍贵的手稿避免了可能散失的命运，这是值得大大庆幸的。
  
  今年2月，为纪念建社五十周年，台湾皇冠出版社不失时机地推出《同学少年都不贱》繁体字单行本，紧接着大陆简体字本也将隆重登场。犹记三年前我自美国回国时，行囊中最为珍视的就是这部《同学少年都不贱》手稿复印件，这是承南加大东方图书馆的美意，特许我再复印的。三年来我常常翻阅这部手稿，哪怕就为欣赏张爱玲的钢笔书法，也是很难得的艺术享受。现在这部迄今为止唯一确凿无误的张爱玲佚作小说终于公之于世，对广大“张迷”和“张学”研究者而言，不啻是一个大好“喜讯”。我想读者一定会取不同的角度、从不同的层面、用不同的方法来解读《同学少年都不贱》，这是完全可以预期的，这也是张爱玲小说经久不衰的魅力所在。