Collected Works of Deng Weizhi Preface

                                                       Deng Weizhi

Time flies. Without realizing it, I have become a candle flame flickering in the wind. I see Death beckoning me towards him.

As I advance, ready to shake hands with Death, I look back on my life and feel that I am as insignificant as a grain of sand.

After graduating from university in 1960, I did not accomplish anything earth-shattering. I seem to have done only one thing: take my pen to write essays.

In my childhood I worked with a sickle; that was to cut grass to feed animals, not to reap wheat or soybeans. Before the Cultural Revolution, I worked with a hammer every Thursday afternoon to pound iron plates in a machine repair workshop whilst my Master rested. I wrote essays 365 days a year. I will never forget the words of my Tutor; “practice every day, write every day”. I used to write with ink on paper, now I write characters on my laptop. I write before the birds start to sing in the morning and I continue till late at night. In the winter of 1960, I joined the political movement Fan Wu Feng and went to live in the house of a farmer, member of a commune. I did not have a desk, and private writing was forbidden. I hid in a cemetery and continued to read, with my back to the wind in the winter and in hot sunshine during the summer. I read as much as possible so that I might write again some day. My writing received important awards; yet, it got me also into serious trouble. Some 20 years ago, my situation was extremely vulnerable. I felt, even as I wrote, that no one would ever publish my work. At one stage, I thought I might have to set up a small kiosk in order to survive financially whilst I continued to read and to write my magnum opus

My motivation for working hard at writing has long been encouraged and influenced by my environment. Spending decades of my career in the world of theory and academia, I am convinced that writing matters above all else. A military officer’s prestige and commands can be such that they may be immediately understood and carried out, but they seem to me less effective and impressive in the long run than the power of a well-written word.

Money is a symbol of civilization. Nowadays, one could not survive without it, but the cultural value of money does not compare to a small written article influencing public opinion. A printed piece of paper is easily torn, yet paper money does not tear if run over by a car. A small written article may catch attention and may touch someone’s heart and enter his soul. It is not something which can be bought with large sums of money. Nothing matters more than writing, This may seem exaggerated, but at its very core, writing is more than power and money. Even the best political argument or modern economic theory cannot do without the written word.

There is an ancient Chinese saying, “all human relationships deserve to be written down”. I follow the teachings of my Tutor during the sixties who said “everything happening around you in the world counts as wisdom”. There exist so many environment and animal protection societies around the world, but there are none who respect the value of the common housefly, so that I once, after having observed them for a while, I wrote an article about “The Necessity to Revise the General Opinion Regarding the Common Housefly”, which praised its antibiotic properties suitable to be exploited in pharmaceuticals. Once, when I was in Italy, I met ostrich farmers who did not believe that the birds buried their heads in sand to block out reality. This immediately made me write an article criticizing the popular “ostrich policy” metaphor.

However, this predilection of being distracted by so many occurrences and being inspired by all and sundry inevitably results in disparate and superficial learning and writing. It lacks concentration. The most serious weakness in my collected works is the wide range of topics. When I was a child, I read an article written by Guo Moruo in which regretted having written of so many diverse topics. Yet, why did he carry on that way?

The problem is: I trained in the various styles of syncretism when I studied at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences from 1960 to 1962. My mentor there provided countless reasons and cited innumerable case studies in order  to get us to accept the importance of syncretism. Old party commissioner Lu Dingyi considered my mentor, party secretary Li Peinan, to be a “young Karl Marx”. He trained us to become commentators of syncretism in order to mediate between dissenting parties so that decisions could be arrived at. The president of our department, Yang Yongzhi, likened syncretists to machine guns because of their being flexible and lighter than heavy artillery. Our vice president told us how a U.S. president once honoured a critic by paying him a new year visit. He taught us also “The Four Books and the Five Classics” and asked us to learn “Eighteen Songs on a Nomad’s Flute” etc. All the twenty students in the department were convinced that we owed our country such syncretism as long as we lived. With this preconception, I later joined the Encyclopaedia of China and continued being a syncretist. I worked for almost ten years in natural sciences during the “Cultural Revolution”, from April 1971 till 1980, passively for reasons of safety to begin with and actively and with conviction later. I enjoyed my venture into natural sciences. The gap between different disciplines is said to be as large as mountains, but I feel strongly that there are universally applicable principles. I mean that once I developed a passion for syncretism, I came to consider it a universal principle. Syncretism gives texts breadth and depth. It makes it easier for the reader, enhances his knowledge and interest. Only syncretism can readily lead to heterosis. Sometimes it is natural sciences, sometimes social sciences; the more they differ, the stronger and more effective is syncretism. The most important feature of it is the fact that it stimulates peoples’ imagination, associations, and arguments which spark ideas leading to innovation. Syncretism is widely misunderstood and seen as disorganization. There exist disorganized essays on syncretism. It is, however, also possible to create syncretism that is not disorganized. There is convergence in spite of chaos. Adequate understanding needs to be coupled with the power to explain. If you throw a fishing net, your success rests on your ability to retrieve it and haul it in with the catch.

My self-discipline (? self restraint) began when I taught family sociology in the department of sociology at Fudan University, Campus Shanghai. It was the first sociology department to be revived in China after the “Cultural Revolution”, and it became later the Faculty of Social Science at Shanghai university. In the month of February 1981, I officially started teaching the Family Sociology class in which I abridged subjects in order to concentrate. However, sociology is in itself multi-faceted and comprehensive, and I arrived at feeling that the course did not do justice to syncretism.  

According to UNESCO, there existed at the end of the twentieth century 111 sub-disciplines of sociology and as many as 120 according to some American experts, now topped by 170 sociological sub-disciplines counted by colleagues at the Nanjing Academy of Social Sciences at the start of the present century.

Under “Deng Weizhi Collected Works” (the volumes should perhaps be given a number each), “Volume Culture” is actually cultural sociology, “Volume Education” is akin to sociology of education; “Volume Popular Science” is almost sociology of science, "Volume Media" could be called sociology of mass media. "Volume Political Participation" might be sociology of politcs based on sociological participating investigation. "Volume Characters" and "Volume Experience" are not systematic social reviews, but more or less social commentaries. Altogether do the volumes form only a small part of different sociological sub-disciplines. I am called a sociologiest in the media, but I am only a modest "sub-sociologist". When wen discuss social structure, my support is usually for the poor. I insist that governments should fight for and support the socially weak, and I am proud of my title as "sociologist for the poor".

As an unqualified “-ologist”, I have written right articles under the right political policy; I have written seriously wrong articles under the wrong political policy. To be frank, I have also written wrong articles under the right political policy and right articles under the wrong political policy. The wrong articles were published in 2008 under the title “Collection of Deng Weizhi”. This time, there are more wrong articles published as “Collected Works of Deng Weizhi”, covering even those not read by anybody and some unpublished social investigation pieces for the peoples’ commune before sociology was reinstated in China. I am my wrong articles; I am an “-ologist” with my wrong articles. This is my moral foundation. In this collection, I criticize some people’s works which contain right articles only and delete the wrong ones.

I particularly concentrate on the works of those whom I used to respect as my superiors. Previously and due to their influence, juniors would write wrong articles, but to see their collections now, it seems as though their superiors had never spoken a wrong word. I sometimes hate myself for my excellent memory. If I could forget the wrong spoken by my superiors, then I would not behave according to Mencius who said “When speaking to an important person, regard him as with a degree of contempt and do not let yourself be taken in by his lofty status.” If I could forget my superiors’ wrong statements, I could really admire their works. However, in some way or another, the more they cover up their wrong words, the more I remember them as incorrect.

Republishing wrong articles is, of course, not meant to forward wrong opinions, but they should warn us against repeating such errors. I believe that wrong ideas should not be forgotten, because once recognized they guide us on the right way. Wounds make us mature. The past is not the present, but it is not the future either. Our wounds are healing in this changed world. According to historical materialism, correctness and mistakes both have their historical values. I do not regret my past. I do not search for what I missed. I would not seek what does not belong to me. I only cherish the wealth that I have accomplished till this day –about 3000 articles. This my aim in publishing this collection.

The heart and a good or bad conscience balance themselves. Fans, web users, and readers, each have their own standards of evaluation. Rights and wrongs cannot change history. They should be given over to readers and society. This also my purpose for publishing this collection.

Academia has no limits, but a collection must have them. This collection is therefore not complete, namely for two reasons, firstly around 0.1 % articles are missing and secondly that, after the collection has been published and if I am still alive then, I shall probably continue to write. Newspapers have lately said that my Chinese zodiac sign is “Book”. Life is like a book, like one that has no words and never ends. I shall continue to write till I die.

I hope that this collection, which is full of rights and wrongs, will be widely discussed.