Der vollständige Text kann >>hier<< aufgerufen, heruntergeladen oder ausgedruckt werden. Im folgenden eine Leseprobe:
„Irgend etwas einem europäischen Roman entsprechendes gibt es in Tibet nicht, ja, wir müssen sagen, die lamaistische Literatur gehört bei allem religionsgeschichtlichem Interesse, welches sie beansprucht, zum allerlangweiligsten, was sich der normale Mensch vorstellen kann.” 1
Thus reflects August Herrman Francke in a report published in 1906 in the Missionsblatt der Brüdergemeine upon the various obstacles he encounters in editing what was the first Tibetan-language newspaper, the La dvags ag bar. One of the main problems in compiling an interesting (and hence commercially successful) paper, he noted, was the lack of entertaining and complex literature in Tibetan. He would have certainly been surprised, and maybe even pleased, to see the development of Tibetan literature over the last two decades.
In fact, in Tibet a secular, or more prcisely a fictional literature—apart from a few exceptions such as Gshon nu zla med kyi gtam rgyud, Gzhon nu drug gi rtogs brjod or Bya mgrin sngon zla ba’i rtogs brjod 2—has only developed within the last 50 years under the influence of Chinese political campaigns in Tibet. Mao Zedong had laid down the guidelines for a new Chinese literature in his Yan’an Talks on Literature and Art in May 1942. This literature was named Socialist Realism and was meant to support the party spirit and to serve the politics of the Communist Party. After the so-called peaceful liberation, Socialist Realist literature was also promoted in Tibet. Today the basic principles of the Yan’an Talks are still valid.
However, the liberalisation of the 1980s, brought more social und cultural freedoms to the whole of China, and normative and affirmative Socialist Realism gave way to a range literary modes. In Tibet a “modern literature” (gsar rtsom) started to emerge. Tibetan authors emancipated themselves from both traditional poetics and the political function of literature, and started to experiment with different literary techniques. A set of new genres came into existence and since the 1980s one can observe, beside the still dominant (socialist and critical) realistic literature, free verse poetry, reportage, magical realistic literature, and a great variety of stories written in a highly subjective mode3. The major innovation of gsar rtsom is its departure from the traditional normative poetics of the Indian writer Dandin, a change which seemingly only became possible through the influence of Maoist aesthetics. In the early 1980s the Tibetan literary canon was for the first time since centuries opened up for technical and thematic innovation. However, more traditional writers continue to follow the classical norms of poetics and are active in reviving classical literary genres, as can be seen from the numerous literary journals published by monasteries throughout Amdo and Khams.
Traces of literature’s political function, however, can still be found. For example, part of the texts were written to expose the errors and misdeeds of the ‘Gang of Four’, part of the so called “Literature of the Wounded” or “Scar Literature” throughout China in the early 1980s. Some of the stories of Don grub rgyal may be included in this category, as could stories which accuse cadres of abusive behaviour4 or Tibetans of stubborn traditionalism5. In textbooks and theoretical articles in literary journals the social benefit and didactic value of literature is still being discussed.
In the following pages, however, I will first try to establish the notion of Magical Realism as one among the newly adopted literary modes in Tibetan literary discourse. Secondly, I will take a closer look at two stories by the Amdowan writer Ljang bu which are repeatedly mentioned in Tibetan sources. Finally, I will attempt to offer an interpretation of Magical Realism in Tibetan literature based on these texts in order to show Magical Realism as literary technique understood by Tibetans as a means for the creative re-establishment of Tibetan culture and identity within the context of Chinese modernity.
II
The term Magical Realism is some eighty years old and its history shows a great variety of use in the history of arts, literary history and theory and, in recent years, in postcolonial criticism. It became more recently a term designating a literature from the margins and thus became almost synonymous with terms like ‘Third World Literature’ or ‘Commonwealth Literature’ (see Scheffel 1990 and Ashcroft, et al. 1998). In the West the notion of magical realism is repeatedly mentioned in connection with Tibetan contemporary literature, usually to label the writings of Tashi Dawa (e.g. Grünfelder 1999, Schiaffini-Vedani 2002). Even though magic realist literature has a long tradition, it only became known in Tibet through Chinese translations of Latin American writers in the genre, especially that of Gabriel García Márquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude at the beginning of the 1980s. Thus intercultural exchange was realised through the medium of Chinese language.
The label Magical Realism is not only applied by Western scholars. Tibetan critics themselves make use of it to designate a literary mode within gsar rtsom. For example, the author and critic rDo rje rin chen closes his chapter on Latin American Magical Realism with his observation:
1 Francke, August Hermann 1906: Vom Redaktionspult der tibetischen Zeitung. Missionsblatt der Brüdergemeine 70, 11: 359. “In Tibet nothing equivalent to the European novels exists. We even have to say, despite all interest in religious history it claims, one cannot deny that lamaistic literature is the most boring thing one could think of.”
2 For more examples see van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. 2002: Die tibetische Literatur. In: Neues Handbuch der Literaturwissenschaft. Wiebelsheim: Aula: 115-132. While giving an overview of the Tibetan novel, van der Kuijp also emphasises both the Sanskrit origins and the primarily religious function of these works of fiction.
3 A Tibetan term might be nang gi ‘jig rten (the inner world) or sems khams, derived from rtsom rig sems khams rig pa or literary psychology.
4 E.g. O rgyan rdo rje 1987: sGo brdung ba’i sgra. [22.03.1987], Bod ljongs nyin re’i tshags par.
5 E.g. Don grub rgyal’s Sad kyis bcom pa’i me tog or Rdo rje mkhar, <Reb gong> 2001: Ca ne. In: sGrungs gtam rlabs kyi gzegs ma., ed. Sangs rgyas. Zi ling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang: 151-154.
„Irgend etwas einem europäischen Roman entsprechendes gibt es in Tibet nicht, ja, wir müssen sagen, die lamaistische Literatur gehört bei allem religionsgeschichtlichem Interesse, welches sie beansprucht, zum allerlangweiligsten, was sich der normale Mensch vorstellen kann.” Thus reflects August Herrman Francke in a report published in 1906 in the Missionsblatt der Brüdergemeine upon the various obstacles he encounters in editing what was the first Tibetan-language newspaper, the La dvags ag bar. One of the main problems in compiling an interesting (and hence commercially successful) paper, he noted, was the lack of entertaining and complex literature in Tibetan. He would have certainly been surprised, and maybe even pleased, to see the development of Tibetan literature over the last two decades.
In fact, in Tibet a secular, or more prcisely a fictional literature—apart from a few exceptions such as Gshon nu zla med kyi gtam rgyud, Gzhon nu drug gi rtogs brjod or Bya mgrin sngon zla ba’i rtogs brjod —has only developed within the last 50 years under the influence of Chinese political campaigns in Tibet. Mao Zedong had laid down the guidelines for a new Chinese literature in his Yan’an Talks on Literature and Art in May 1942. This literature was named Socialist Realism and was meant to support the party spirit and to serve the politics of the Communist Party. After the so-called peaceful liberation, Socialist Realist literature was also promoted in Tibet. Today the basic principles of the Yan’an Talks are still valid.
However, the liberalisation of the 1980s, brought more social und cultural freedoms to the whole of China, and normative and affirmative Socialist Realism gave way to a range literary modes. In Tibet a “modern literature” (gsar rtsom) started to emerge. Tibetan authors emancipated themselves from both traditional poetics and the political function of literature, and started to experiment with different literary techniques. A set of new genres came into existence and since the 1980s one can observe, beside the still dominant (socialist and critical) realistic literature, free verse poetry, reportage, magical realistic literature, and a great variety of stories written in a highly subjective mode. The major innovation of gsar rtsom is its departure from the traditional normative poetics of the Indian writer Dandin, a change which seemingly only became possible through the influence of Maoist aesthetics. In the early 1980s the Tibetan literary canon was for the first time since centuries opened up for technical and thematic innovation. However, more traditional writers continue to follow the classical norms of poetics and are active in reviving classical literary genres, as can be seen from the numerous literary journals published by monasteries throughout Amdo and Khams.
Traces of literature’s political function, however, can still be found. For example, part of the texts were written to expose the errors and misdeeds of the ‘Gang of Four’, part of the so called “Literature of the Wounded” or “Scar Literature” throughout China in the early 1980s. Some of the stories of Don grub rgyal may be included in this category, as could stories which accuse cadres of abusive behaviour or Tibetans of stubborn traditionalism. In textbooks and theoretical articles in literary journals the social benefit and didactic value of literature is still being discussed.
In the following pages, however, I will first try to establish the notion of Magical Realism as one among the newly adopted literary modes in Tibetan literary discourse. Secondly, I will take a closer look at two stories by the Amdowan writer Ljang bu which are repeatedly mentioned in Tibetan sources. Finally, I will attempt to offer an interpretation of Magical Realism in Tibetan literature based on these texts in order to show Magical Realism as literary technique understood by Tibetans as a means for the creative re-establishment of Tibetan culture and identity within the context of Chinese modernity.
II
The term Magical Realism is some eighty years old and its history shows a great variety of use in the history of arts, literary history and theory and, in recent years, in postcolonial criticism. It became more recently a term designating a literature from the margins and thus became almost synonymous with terms like ‘Third World Literature’ or ‘Commonwealth Literature’ (see Scheffel 1990 and Ashcroft, et al. 1998). In the West the notion of magical realism is repeatedly mentioned in connection with Tibetan contemporary literature, usually to label the writings of Tashi Dawa (e.g. Grünfelder 1999, Schiaffini-Vedani 2002). Even though magic realist literature has a long tradition, it only became known in Tibet through Chinese translations of Latin American writers in the genre, especially that of Gabriel García Márquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude at the beginning of the 1980s. Thus intercultural exchange was realised through the medium of Chinese language.
The label Magical Realism is not only applied by Western scholars. Tibetan critics themselves make use of it to designate a literary mode within gsar rtsom. For example, the author and critic rDo rje rin chen closes his chapter on Latin American Magical Realism with his observation:
