Cassie Wen
Changing Authenticity in Chinese Nonfiction feixugou: A Historical Review
by Cassie Wen
At the core of all nonfiction writing lies the question of authenticity. For modern and contemporary Chinese nonfiction in various forms of media, Charles A. Laughlin (2002) creatively linked the notion of verisimilitude in studies of fiction narratives yet rarely discussed in relation to nonfiction literature. It would be erroneous to normalize the notion that nonfiction narrative is “authentic” and “not constructed”, by assuming that true stories simply tell themselves. Chinese nonfiction including reportage literatures, news feature articles, and biographical books are exactly “in the verbal/artistic construction of the event that the writer imparts the tendentious message to it” (28).
Photo from brotiN biswaS on Pexels
Since the New Culture Movement, authenticity has been the subject of many a debate in Chinese nonfiction, especially with literary endeavors taking the form of reportage in the 1930s. Its developmental timeline is deeply intertwined with China’s socio-political transformation for the century: reportage at its very beginning in modern Chinese literature accentuates the Left’s initiatives and functions as a tool for not only speaking for but also waking up the proletariat through literacy education and political indoctrination.
Under the influence of the Worker Correspondents Movement (Gongren tongxun yundong), endorsed by the cultural wing of the German Communist Party, the League of Left-Wing Writers in China led by Lu Xun and other celebrated literati aimed to publish nonfiction journal articles about labour issues. Later, when reportage followed more of an orthodox style and toed the party line focusing on the establishment of the New China, unique “lines of flight” of Chinese nonfiction writing persisted. Compared with any other form of art in PRC history, reportage has expressed explicit polemical and critical views towards the societal structure, and even the political system.
However, it is also worth highlighting the decline of Chinese reportage after 1989 that occurred due to two reasons: first, the profound impact of the Tiananmen Square protests; and the progression of the Reform and Opening-up, which was highlighted by a shift from reportage to nonfiction, at least in name. On the one hand, the domestic political tension cause people to adopt “nonfiction” (非虛構 feixugou) and tacitly distance themselves from the term “reportage”, allowing them to provide a declaration of innocence, that their writing did not have radical political intentions. On the other hand, the influence of New Journalism from the West, along with the overall commercialization of the media (although still under state control), contributed to this departure from reportage as well.
There continues to be a dynamic undercurrent in this field. Over the last two decades, feixugou / Chinese nonfiction writing in various forms and media channels has mushroomed and has “presented much more than the anodyne term feixugou” (Laughlin 2023: 192). The ongoing literary expressions have revealed uncomfortable aspects of contemporary reality as a corrective, or at least an alternative discourse to counter the party-state; and even challenge the mainstream narratives of the economy, if we consider the volume of nonfiction surrounding labour issues. Hence, the current relationship between these terms with regards to their political implication is complicated. “Without suggesting that contemporary Chinese nonfiction is simply an imitation of new journalism, its departure from reportage, if any, does seem to lean in this direction. On the other hand, it has more in common with the critical types of Chinese reportage throughout the twentieth century than with these other forms. The reason for this is that one of the fundamental ongoing endeavors in Chinese literary writing has been to reveal uncomfortable aspects of contemporary reality (and historical memory) as a corrective to official or mainstream discourses” (Laughlin 2023: 193).
Photo from ron lach on Pexels
Although the genres of current feixugou nonfiction and the older form of reportage in China are historically and politically connected, there are compelling distinctions between their internal ideologies and the ethics of writing. Historically, there is both a departure from and also a connection with the communist legacy of reportage, mostly lacking any political intentions in the text; and from a global perspective, authenticity is considered in relation to emotionality as reductive of authenticity under the influence of New Journalism. Chinese nonfiction has had a meaningful change of characteristics in different conceptions of authenticity and the teleology of writing.
First, new nonfiction does not possess the positive implication and intention of revolution as the reportage published in the 1930s. Second, earlier forms of reportage were largely alienated from and even critical of journalism due to its bourgeois, capitalist or imperialist interests; current nonfiction bears a close attachment to journalism, especially in the form of feature writing, and investigative nonfiction pieces published on digital platforms. Finally, reportage at its revolutionary core embraced the aspiration of remaking historical facts meaningful for transformation other than for hollow objectivity — on the contrary, nonfiction moving closer to New Journalism emphasizes on veracity / authenticity.
Shen Yanni, the chief editor of The Livings (人間, one of the most well-known non-fiction agencies owned by NetEase, active on new media platforms) once expressed her selection criteria: “At The Livings, the primary criterion for nonfiction is authenticity, and our editorial department will spend 60-80% of the editing time to do authenticity verification via interviews, hoping that the author can provide some proof of authenticity…… The editor will ask the author whether people in the narratives have expressed their thinking or whether it is the writer’s subjective guess. This is a kind of respect. We still want readers to see what the author sees, too, not what the author imagines” (Shouguang and Guan 2022).
Although in practice, nonfiction agencies under the market logic might to be as respectful as they say (particularly for some WeChat public accounts have been criticized for serious privacy infringement, sensation seeking, and even voyeurism), the public claim of prioritizing authenticity and certain standards set for editorial process still manifest the values of authenticity of Chinese nonfiction in new era.
Reference:
Laughlin, Charles A. 2002. Chinese Reportage: The Aesthetics of Historical Experience. Duke University Press.
———. 2023. “Reportage and the Forms of Nonfiction Art in China.” A World History of Chinese Literature.
Shouguang, Xie, and Kai. Guan. 2022. Sociological and Anthropological Implications of Nonfiction Writing (Feixugou Xiezuo de Shehuixue Yu Renleixue Yihan 非虚构写作的社会学与人类学意涵). Social Sciences Academic Press (China).