1. The name Wenxue yanjiu hui can be translated as Literary Research Association, Society for Literary Studies etc. Colophons of books published under the aegis of the association usually carry the English translation The Chinese Literary Association. In the rest of this article, I shall use the shorter form The Literary Association throughout.

2. Xizu, Zhu (1879–1944)Google Scholar, Baili, Jiang (1882–1938)Google Scholar, Zuoren, Zhou (1885–1967)Google Scholar, Dishan, Xu (1893–1944)Google Scholar, Shaoyu, Guo (1893–1984)Google Scholar, Shengtao, Ye (1894–1988)Google Scholar, Fuyuan, Sun (1894–1966)Google Scholar, Tongzhao, Wang (1897–1957)Google Scholar, Yanbing, Shen (1896–1981)Google Scholar, Zhenduo, Zheng (1898–1958)Google Scholar, Jizhi, Geng (1899–1947)Google Scholar, Shiying, Qu (1900–1970).Google Scholar

3. Quan, Fan (ed.), Zhongguo xiandai wenxue shetuan liupai cidian (Dictionary of Societies and Schools in Modern Chinese Literature) (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1993).Google Scholar

4. The most remarkable (but not the earliest!) being the Yisu she, founded in Shaanxi in 1912, which has remained in existence under the same name until the present day. Ibid. pp. 341–4.

5. Ibid. p. 461. Another society, called the Fiction Research Society (Xiaoshuo yanjiu she) was founded at Qinghua in December 1920, i.e. at roughly the same time as the founding of the Wenxue yanjiu hui, by Liang Shiqiu, Zhai Huan and Gu Yiqiao (ibid. p. 576). The latter two later joined the Wenxue yanjiu hui.

6. Zhifang, Jia et al. , Wenxue yanjiu hui ziliao (Materials on the Literary Association) (hereafter WXYJHZL) (Zhengzhou: Henan renmin chubanshe, 1985), pp. 21–41.Google Scholar

7. This description not only fits the majority of treatments of the Association in Chinese literary histories, but also standard English-language sources such as Ayers, William, “The Society for Literary Studies, 1921–1930,” Papers on China, Vol.7 (02 1953), pp. 34–79Google Scholar and Tagore, Amitendranath, Literary Debates in Modern China 1918–1937 (Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies, 1967)Google Scholar. Association members' contributions to literary translation and the introduction of Western literary theories are treated in McDougall, Bonnie S., The Introduction of Western Literary Theories into Modern China 1919–1925 (Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies, 1971)Google Scholar. For a critical discussion of the realism of Association members, see Anderson, Marston, The Limits of Realism: Chinese Fiction in the Revolutionary Period (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990)Google Scholar. Two sources that do touch upon the Association's institutional existence and its role within the literary scene are Lee, Leo Ou-fan, The Romantic Generation of Modern Chinese Writers (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Xiaoming, Wang, “Yige zazhi he yige ‘shetuan’: lun ‘wusi’ wenxue chuantong” (“A journal and a ‘society’: on the ‘May Fourth’ literary tradition”), Jintian (Today), No. 3/4 (1991), pp. 94–114Google Scholar. They constituted a major source of inspiration for this article.

8. It should be pointed out here that the present article does not intend to go so far as to come up with new “readings” of texts on the basis of conclusions about literary practice, although this is part of the larger research project of which this article is a part. For an example of what such readings might look like, see Hockx, Michel, “Mad women and mad men: intraliterary contact in Early Republican literature,” in Findeisen, Raoul D. and Gassmann, Robert H. (eds.), Autumn Floods: Essays in Honor of Marián Gálik (Bern: Peter Lang, 1998).Google Scholar

9. Ownby, David, Brotherhoods and Secret Societies in Early and Mid-Qing China: The Formation of a Tradition (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar

10. Goodman, Bryna, Native Place, City, and Nation: Regional Networks and identities in Shanghai, 1853–1937 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995).Google Scholar

11. Although the present article focuses on the late 1910s and early 1920s, a more comprehensive approach to literary societies and the Chinese literary field should naturally start in an earlier period and at least include the famous Southern Society (Nan she), a large, well-organized society for traditional(ist) literature which was active around the time of the 1911 revolution. Recently, many new materials on this society have appeared in print and it is in the focus of attention of scholars throughout the world, some of whom have joined in a “Society for Nan She Studies,” based in Hong Kong.

12. Bourdieu, Pierre, The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field, trans. Emanuel, Susan (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996), p. 267Google Scholar. For a succinct introduction to Bourdieu's views on literature, see Bourdieu, Pierre, “The field of cultural production, or: the economic world reversed,” Poetics, Vol. 12 (1983), pp. 311–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Parts of The Rules of Art were included in an earlier English-language publication entitled The Field of Cultural Production (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993)Google Scholar. English translations of Bourdieuan concepts used in this article have all been taken from The Rules of Art. For a complete and constantly updated bibliography of Bourdieu's works in various languages, see http://www.massey.ac.nz/~NZSRDA/bourdieu/home.htm.

13. Cf. Bourdieu, , The Rules of Art, pp. 77–81.Google Scholar

14. “Societies” and “schools” are usually mentioned in one breath in the titles of relevant reference works, such as Zhifang, Jia et al. , Zhongguo xiandai wenxue shetuan liupai (Modern Chinese Literary Societies and Schools) (Zhengzhou: Henan renmin chubanshe, 1989)Google Scholar and Quan, Fan, Dictionary of Modern Chinese Literary Societies and SchoolsGoogle Scholar. The latter does make the distinction in his introduction (p. 6), emphasizing that a group of writers with similar ideas should have some influence before they can be called a “school.” Ayers, , in his conclusion to “The Society for Literary Studies,”Google Scholar displays a lack of distinction between institution and ideology when he identifies the Association with “humanitarianism,” “realism” and “revolution.”

15. WXYJHZL, pp. 1–3Google Scholar. The Manifesto was also published in a few newspapers in mid–December 1920.

16. Literature Trimonthly, No. 43 (07 1922), p. 4.Google Scholar

17. This means that there must have been another meeting after the inaugural meeting, since the report about the latter states that the series of books was only briefly discussed and no decisions were taken. There are indeed two “Reports on Association Affairs” missing. Nos. 1 and 2 were published in the February 1921 issue of The Short Story Monthly, whereas the one about the 21 March meeting is Report No. 5. It is possible that those reports were circulated among members only. See below in the section on the Association membership, where Zhenduo, Zheng is quoted talking about “printing circulars.”Google Scholar

18. WXYJHZL, pp. 572–73.Google Scholar

19. The Chinese word used is shencha, which nowadays means “censoring” but is not used in that sense here.

20. Jiang Baili's status within the New Culture community may have been underestimated by scholars so far. Godley claims that Jiang, , “arguably the foremost military theorist in the modern period, … was just as influential in the intellectual community, listing not only Cai Yuanpei, Hu Shi, Liang Qichao, Zhang Dongsun, Carson Chang (Zhang Jiasen) and Ding Wenjiang as friends, but others who ended up on the political left.”Google Scholar See Godley, Michael R., “More than a footnote: Jiang Baili and the New Culture Movement,” unpublished paper presented at The Asian Studies Association of Australia Biennial Conference, 13–16 07 1994Google Scholar, Murdoch University, Perth, p. 1. Cited with the author's permission.

21. For a detailed account of the meeting, see Fukang, Chen, Zheng Zhenduo lun (On Zheng Zhenduo) (Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1991), pp. 399–412.Google Scholar

22. WXYJHZL, pp. 4–7.Google Scholar

23. Bourdieu, , The Rules of Art, p. 79.Google Scholar

24. The terms “moralistic” and “amoral” are used in this sentence to reflect the value judgment inherent in the position of the proponents of new literature. They do not represent my own judgment of classical and popular Chinese literature.

25. The first contact between Association founders and Commercial Press representatives also took place within the context of the publication of a series of translated works of Russian literature (the Gongxue she congshu (Common Study Society Series)), which was edited by Jiang Baili, and to which Zheng Zhenduo and Geng Jizhi contributed. See Fukang, Chen, Zheng Zhenduo lun, p. 402Google Scholar. The Commercial Press also published dozens of translations of foreign novels in its Shuobu congshu (Fiction Series). For the Commercial Press see Drège, Jean-Pierre, La Commercial Press de Shanghai 1897–1949 (Paris: Collège de France, Institut des hautes études chinoises, 1978).Google Scholar

26. Cf. Liu, Lydia, Translingual Practice: Literature, National Character, and Translated Modernity – China 1900–1937 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), p. 273.Google Scholar

27. Cf. the following remark from a 1921 article by Yanbing, Shen (Mao Dun): “Literature has nowadays become a kind of science. Its object of research is human life – modern day human life – and its research tools are Poetry, Drama and Fiction”Google Scholar [italicized words appear in English in the original and are translated as shi, juben and shuobu respectively] (WXYJHZL, p. 57).Google Scholar

28. The transformation of the fiction genre taking place between the late Qing and the May Fourth periods constitutes the most typical example of this emerging “dualist structure” within vernacular literature. See Pingyuan, Chen, Zhongguo xiaoshuo xushi moshi de zhuanbian (The Transformation of the Narrative Modes of Chinese Fiction) (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1988)Google Scholar. The term “dualist structure” is Bourdieu's. Cf. Bourdieu, , The Rules of Art, pp. 113–140.Google Scholar

29. Cf. the following lines from the “manifesto” of the Beijing organ of the Association, Wenxue xunkan (Literature Trimonthly), a supplement to the Chen bao (Morning News), published in the first issue on 1 June 1923: “We cannot tolerate counter-literary works, ‘such as’ the blind ‘restoration school’ (fugu pai) and the boring and socially poisonous low-grade popular literature.”

30. “Zuihou yi ye” (“The last page”), The Short Story Monthly, Vol. 14, No. 2 (02 1923).Google Scholar

31. It should be noted that the usage and interpretation of the term wenxue described here differ from those of the period 1895–1908, as described in Huters, Theodore, “A new way of writing: the possibilities for literature in late Qing China, 1895–1908,” Modern China, Vol. 14, No. 3 (07 1988), pp. 243–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As Huters points out, late Qing intellectuals, though equally fond of using the term wenxue, tended to keep their discussions of prose separate from those of poetry. Moreover, the possibility of wenxue including a “low” form, produced for entertainment and financial gain, is not mentioned by Huters, nor is drama discussed. It seems that the “May Fourth” generation, though building upon preceding reforms, was the first to grasp what Huters calls, “the overall profile of the concept of wenxue” (ibid. p. 272, n. 2) and apply it to Chinese writing practice. However, more detailed studies of the neglected period between “late Qing” and “May Fourth” (roughly 1908–1917)Google Scholar may in the future undermine this assertion.

32. Ibid. p. 272.

33. Lee, Leo Ou-fan, The Romantic Generation of Modern Chinese Writers, pp. 12–13.Google Scholar

34. See letter dated 11 August 1921 in Zhongtian, Sun and Ming, Zhou (eds.), Mao Dun shuxinji (Mao Dun's Letters) (Beijing: Wenhua jiaoyu chubanshe, 1988), p. 21.Google Scholar

35. The June 1921 announcement in Eastern Miscellany mentioned 83 titles. The later Series ended up containing 107 titles, of which only eight were completely identical (same title, same author/translator) with the original plan (WXYJHZL, pp. 1372–74).Google Scholar

36. This is implicit further evidence of the fact that The Short Story Monthly was not perceived as an Association organ by members of the Association itself.

37. Zheng enjoyed the favour of one of the Commercial Press executives, Gao Mengdan, whom he had met in Beijing at Jiang Baili's house. Both Gao and Zheng came from the same county in Fujian (Cf. Fukang, Chen, Zheng Zhenduo zhuan (Biography of Zheng Zhenduo) (Beijing: Shiyue wenyi chubanshe, 1994), p. 64Google Scholar). Zheng Zhenduo later married Gao's daughter, Gao Junzhen (Association member no. 131).

38. “Jinhou zhi benkan” (“The future of this supplement”), Literature Trimonthly, No. 36 (1922), p. 1.Google Scholar

39. See Hockx, Michel, A Snowy Morning: Eight Chinese Poets on the Road to Modernity (Leiden: CNWS, 1994), pp. 66–68.Google Scholar

40. The “literary scene” (wentan) of May Fourth Shanghai has been described in Lee, Leo Ou-fan, The Romantic Generation of Modern Chinese WritersGoogle Scholar. I use the term “literary scene” to refer to phenomena and activities related to the public image of literature and writers. The scene is only a small part of the literary field, which represents the relations between all those who produce literature and its value.

41. The word used is tongzhi “comrade,” at the time a very popular term of address within all kinds of collectives. I have opted for the translation “fellow member” to avoid unwarranted associations with Communist Party discourse. In the Association's manifesto, the term tongzhi is even used as an adjective, in the phrase tongzhi de renmin “people with like ambitions.”

42. The Young China Association (Shaonian Zhongguo xuehui; 1918–1924?)Google Scholar was probably the largest and most active Chinese student organization of its time. During its heyday, it published two monthlies (Shaonian Zhongguo (Young China) and Shaonian shijie (Young World)), had branch societies all over China and in various foreign countries and held regular meetings. On a membership list published in 1921, the Young China Association counted 95 members, the young Mao Zedong being among them, but also later Literary Association members Zhu Ziqing, Shen Zemin and Yi Jiayue. It seems that the establishment of the Literary Association was at least to a certain extent inspired by the success of the Young China Association. The Literary Association by-laws, including the original stipulation about branch societies, show similarities with the by-laws of the Young China Association. The “Reports on Association Affairs” (huiwu baogao) in the 1921 Short Story Monthly remind one of columns with the same title in Shaonian Zhongguo. Moreover, around the same time as they were trying to establish the Literary Association (late 1920), Zheng Zhenduo, Xu Dishan, Qu Shiying, Wang Tongzhao and Geng Jizhi had their Rendao she (l'Humanité Society) and Shuguang she (Morning Light Society) enter into a “union,” called the Gaizao lianhe (Reform Union), with three other societies, among which was the Young China Association. See the “Fulu” (“Appendix”) in Shaonian Zhongguo (Young China), Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 65–67Google Scholar. For materials on the Young China Association, see Yunhou, Zhang et al. , Wusi shiqi de shetuan (Societies of the May Fourth Period). (Beijing: Shenghuo, dushu, xinzhi sanlian shudian, 1979), pp. 211–572Google Scholar. For a study of its organization, major members and foreign branch societies, see Levine, Marylin A., The Found Generation: Chinese Communists in Europe During the Twenties (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993).Google Scholar

43. WXYJHZL, p. 681.Google Scholar

44. See “Wenxue yanjiu hui tebie qishi” (“Special announcement by the Literary Association”), Literature Trimonthly, No. 37 (1922), p. 4.Google Scholar

45. According to Yanbing, Shen, writing in 11 1922Google Scholar (WXYJHZL, p. 617Google Scholar), he was elected as secretary of that branch, established in the spring of 1922. Shen also mentions that this news was published in Literature Trimonthly. I have been unable to find any such announcement.

46. See “Wenxue yanjiu hui jishi” (“Records of the Literary Association”), Literature Trimonthly, No. 43 (1922), p. 4Google Scholar and the announcement by the Shanghai branch in Literature Trimonthly, no. 42 (1922), p. 1Google Scholar. The hotel in question was the Yi Pin Xiang Hostel, which seems to have been a favourite venue for public occasions involving literary figures. The reception for Zheng Zhenduo's wedding was held there, as was the famous meeting to commemorate the first anniversary of the publication of Moruo, Guo's Nüshen (Goddesses)Google Scholar, which was jointly organized by the Association and the Creation Society in an attempt to achieve reconciliation, but, after a series of misunderstandings, ended in argument and conflict. Cf. WXYJHZL, pp. 614–15.Google Scholar

47. An Association address (huizhi) is mentioned in the special announcement (tebie qishi) in Literature Trimonthly, No. 37 (1922), p. 4Google Scholar. The sign is mentioned in a 1983 interview with Ye Shengtao and his son by the editors of WXYJHZL (WXYJHZL, p. 848).Google Scholar

48. It is not clear when and where Tang and Xu were elected. In all likelihood, their election took place in late 1921 or early 1922, in conformity with the Association by-laws. Since the Association had already stopped publishing announcements in The Short Story Monthly at that time but did not have its own organs yet, no reports appeared in print.

49. One of them being Chen Rongjie, the editor of the Guangzhou, Literature TrimonthlyGoogle Scholar, who is better known to the Western sinological world as Chan, Wing-Tsit (1901–1994).Google Scholar

50. The Guangzhou branch is mentioned in almost all articles and reference works on the Association, as is the name of its organ. However, the organ itself seems to have been lost. The story of the establishment of the Guangzhou branch is recounted in some detail in a 1980 interview with Liu Simu by the editors of WXYJHZL (WXYJHZL, pp. 855–57Google Scholar). According to Liu, he and his friends first established their branch and their organ, before writing to Zheng Zhenduo, who wrote back allowing them to become members of the “nation-wide” Association. According to Yi, Shu, (“Wenxue yanjiu hui he tade huiyuan” (“The Literary Association and its members”), Zhongguo xiandai wenxue yanjiu congkan (Journal for the Study of Modern Chinese Literature), No. 2 (1992) pp. 48–49)Google Scholar, the fame of the Association may have led to similar situations taking place in other Chinese cities. Shu Yi notes that the Chinese writer Liang Bin's memoirs mention the establishment of an Association branch in his middle school in Baoding as late as 1933, reflecting the students' enthusiasm for “new literature”. However, this did not lead, as in the Guangzhou case, to an official affiliation with the Association (see Bin, Liang, Yige xiaoshuojia de zishu (Autobiography of a Fiction Writer) (Beijing: Zhongguo qingnian chubanshe, 1991), p. 103).Google Scholar It is doubtful whether such local associations actually presented themselves as branches of the Association. It seems more likely that wenxue yanjiu hui was a plausible name for literary clubs and/or societies on college campuses. For instance, in 1922, the Nanjing Higher Normal School (Nanjing gaodeng shifan xuexiao or Nanjing gaoshi) had both a wenxue yanjiu hui and a zhexue (philosophy) yanjiu hui. The two jointly edited an organ, published by the Zhonghua shuju and entitled Wenzhe xuebao (Journal of Literature and Philosophy Studies). In the first issue of that organ, which includes a manifesto, no reference at all is made to the Literary Association and there is no other evidence to suggest affiliation.

51. See for instance the announcement “Wenxuejia mingxinpian!!!” (“Postcards of Writers!!!”) in Literature, No. 130 (1924), p. 4Google Scholar. Ye Shengtao's son, Ye Zhishan, in one of his many reminiscences of his father's life and work, has written about these postcards. The article carries reproductions of a few of them. See hishan, Ye, “Wenxue yanjiu hui de wenxue mingxinpian” (“The literary postcards of the Literary Association”), Xin wenxue shiliao (Historical Materials on New Literature), No. 3 (1994), p. 20.Google Scholar

52. “Huiyuan xiaoxi” (“Members' news”), Literature, No. 86, p. 4.Google Scholar

53. “Huanying Taige'er” (“Welcome Tagore”), supplement to The Short Story Monthly, Vol. 15, No. 4 (04 1924).Google Scholar

54. See WXYJHZL, pp. 556–57.Google Scholar

55. Ibid. pp. 565–66.

56. Ibid. p. 886 claims that the Association held a memorial ceremony for Guo Mengliang (member no. 18) on 6 December 1925. I have been unable to trace the respective source.

57. Cf. Bourdieu, , “The field of cultural production, or: the economic world reversed.”Google Scholar

58. Moruo, Guo, “Bianji yutan” (“Some words from the editor”), Chuangzao jikan, Vol. 1, No. 2 (08 1922)Google Scholar. Rpt. in Hongjing, Rao et al. , Chuangzao she ziliao (Materials on the Creation Society) (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin chubanshe, 1985), p. 117.Google Scholar

59. “Feel for the field” is one of the terms used to explain Bourdieu's concept of habitus, or “practical sense.” It refers to the totality of experiences and conditionings that can explain why an agent is attracted to certain practices and certain positions within those practices and, moreover, whether those positions can and will be taken successfully. It is a fluid concept, subject to constant change through interaction with the other two basic concepts of Bourdieu's theory: field and capital. One of the ways in which habitus is manifested and can be observed is the relative ease and naturalness with which agents develop their strategies. In the case of the Creation Society, even though much of their discourse concerning “art for art's sake” has long been deconstructed by scholars, the fact that they realized that building this discourse was a useful strategy to oppose the Literary Association shows a very good feel for their own capacities and the field's possibilities. See also Bourdieu's statement about “negative definition” of “avant-garde groups” at the beginning of this article.

60. WXYJHZL, pp. 613–18.Google Scholar

61. Ibid. pp. 618–626.

62. Ibid. p. 625.

63. Unfortunately, I cannot present this discovery with certainty. Even though almost every reference work gives Zhao Guangrong as a pseudonym of Wang Fuquan, non of them mentions examples of when and where he used that pseudonym. Moreover, most reference works consider Wang Fuquan to be another name of Wang Fuyan. However, two “versions” of Wang Fuquan/Wang Fuyan are circulating: one is a professor of law and translator of Japanese works on literature, a native of Wujin, Jiangsu, born in 1890 and deceased (according to one source murdered) in 1939 or 1940. The other is a translator of Japanese works on literature and law, a native of Yuhang, Zhejiang, born in 1898 or 1899, who was either a traitor or a spy during the War and died in 1959. In reality, Wang Fuyan and Wang Fuquan were probably two people. Works written or translated by Wang Fuyan available in the Beijing University Library are all on law and all published before the War. Works written or translated by Wang Fuquan were all on literature and some were published in the 1950s. Liming, Li, (Zhongguo xiandai liubai zuojia xiao zhuan (Sketch Biographies of 600 Modem Chinese Writers) (Hong Kong: Po Wen Book Shop, 1977), pp. 160–61)Google Scholar mentions that Wang Fuquan was born in 1894 (!) and that he was the editor of the well-known literary magazine Xiandai (Les Contemporains) from 1935 onwards (which is true). Works mentioned by Li are also only on literature. The name Zhao Guangrong occurs in the early issues of Literature Trimonthly, where he serialized a translation of a Japanese work on modern literature. A Chinese translation of the same work was published by the Commercial Press in 1930, translated by Zhang Wentian and Wang Fuquan. According to the Association membership list, however, Zhao Guangrong was a native of Jiading, Jiangsu. Cheng Fangwu's use of the word guangrong “honour” when asking for Fuquan's name could be a hint, but could also be common usage. Whoever Fuquan was, the fact that he published his article in Literature Trimonthly and that he later also published some poems in that supplement seems to prove at least that he was closer to the Association network than to the Creation Society, even though he seems to have been on friendly terms with at least one Creationist: Moruo, Guo, in his Chuangzao shinian (Ten Years of Creation) (Shanghai: Xiandai shuju, 1933), p. 193Google Scholar, mentions that Wang Fuquan visited him on several occasions in the summer of 1922, when Guo was living in Shanghai.

64. Former Association member Gu Yiqiao (Gu Yuxiu, Y. H. Ku) reminisced in correspondence with me that the Creation Society later also resorted to “boycotts,” stopping the publication of one of his short stories in Creation Quarterly after they found he had published something in an Association organ. On a personal level, however, Gu, too, was on good terms with members of both groups.

65. Moruo, Guo was “allowed”Google Scholar to publish a long letter to the editors in Literature in 07 1924Google Scholar, putting forward his views concerning how editors and critics should behave and treat other people. The letter was answered by Zheng Zhenduo and Mao Dun on behalf of the 12 editors of Literature and ended with the statement that they would no longer respond to “insults”.

66. WXYJHZL also mentions two other series, the Xiaoshuo yuebao congkan, a sort of “Best of The Short Story Monthly,” appearing regularly in 1924 and 1925Google Scholar and the “Literature Weekly Series” (Wenxue zhoubao congshu, 1925–1930, 28 vols.Google Scholar, published by Kaiming shudian). Since these two series seem to have had no direct institutional relation with the Association, I have decided to leave them out of the discussion here, despite the fact that most of the works in them were also written and/or translated by Association members.

67. My original argument, as presented in a paper at the 10th EACS Conference, Prague, 1994, was indeed that the Association ceased to exist after 1925. Most other scholars claim that the Association “gradually dissolved” either after Literature Weekly stopped appearing in 1929Google Scholar, or after the establishment of the League of Leftist Writers in 1930, or after the bombing of the Commercial Press by the Japanese in 1932, which signalled the end of The Short Story Monthly.

68. Since the 1924 membership list shows that the addresses of some members were already unknown at the time, it is probable that not all early members faithfully paid their dues. Moreover, Yiqiao, Gu, who joined in 1923Google Scholar, mentioned to me in correspondence that he never paid membership dues.

69. WXYJHZL, p. 854Google Scholar. It is not sure how long this practice continued and whether or not it was applied to all series. When I asked Qian, Xiao, whose Lixia jiGoogle Scholar (Under the Fence) was published in the Literary Association Creative Writing Series in 1936, he stated that he was sure he did not donate any money to the Association (interview, 8 March 1995, Beijing). Gu Yiqiao, in correspondence, stated that he did not receive any royalties, only free copies of his 1923 contribution to the series, the novelette Zhilan yu moli (Violets and Jasmins).

70. Fukang, Chen, Zheng Zhenduo zhuan, p. 90.Google Scholar

71. All PRC reference works offer the same explanation for Lu Xun's refusal to join the Association: being a civil servant working for the Ministry of Education, he was forbidden by law to join public organizations. The original source of this explanation is never cited (nor is the text of the law). It is possible that Lu Xun himself at one stage gave this reason, but it should be obvious that it can only have been a convenient excuse. After all, the Association membership list was never published, so the government had no way of finding out who the members were. If the government would have been interested in finding out, they surely would have suspected Lu Xun of being a member, since he was one of the most active contributors to Association organs. It is much more likely that Lu Xun was by nature reluctant to get involved in large organizations and preferred working alone or within small societies.

72. Quoted in Jinlin, Shang, Ye Shengtao nianpu (Chronological Biography of Ye Shengtao) (Suzhou: Jiangsu jiaoyu chubanshe, 1986), p. 115Google Scholar.

73. Wang's remarks are quoted in Jingzhi, Chen, Wenxue yanjiu hui yu chuangzao she (The Literary Association and the Creation Society) (Taipei: Chengwen, 1980), pp. 38–39.Google Scholar

74. For the importance of the Compendium to the canonization of May Fourth literature, see Liu, Lydia, Translingual Practice, ch. 8.Google Scholar

75. Dun, Mao, “Guanyu ‘Wenxue yanjiu hui’” (“About ‘The Literary Association’”), in Jiabi, Zhao (ed.), Zhongguo xin wenxue daxi (Compendium of Chinese New Literature) (Shanghai: Liangyou, 1935), Vol. 10, p. 88.Google Scholar

76. The original list is now kept in the Modern Chinese Literature Archives (Zhongguo xiandai wenxue guan) in Beijing. Besides the list of names, it also contains an index on family name, place of origin and address, and the Association manifesto and by-laws. It carries a short introduction, mentioning that there had been an earlier membership list drawn up when the Association had 46 members. That list is no longer extant.

77. There is also a second, incomplete list, of 23 members who joined between 1924 and 1928. This list was published in 1948 by Zhao Jingshen, and was based on completed membership application forms found in a drawer in Zheng Zhenduo's office at the Commercial Press. The forms were numbered from 132 to 172 and thus form a sequel to the first list. Unfortunately Zhao did not copy all the names, and the forms were later lost. According to Zhao, the names he left out were those of members who hardly published anything in the area of literature. Since there is no way to verify this, I shall limit the discussion below to the first, printed membership list. Cf. Jingshen, Zhao, “Xiandai zuojia shengping jiguan milu” (“Secret records of modern writers' lives and origins”), in Wentan yijiu (Reminiscing About the Literary Scene) (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1983Google Scholar (reprint; original 1948)), See also interview with Jingshen, Zhao in WXYJHZL, pp. 851–53.Google Scholar

78. For a list of reference works used, see the Appendix.

79. The foreign languages mentioned are (in order of popularity): English (mentioned by 92 members), Japanese (25), French (13), German (10), Russian (7), Ancient Greek (3), Esperanto (3) and Norwegian (1). Sixteen members did not claim any knowledge of foreign languages. One (Hu Tianyue) is unaccounted for, because he had already died by the time the list was drawn up. During a small seminar on “literati collectives” (wenren jituan)Google Scholar, held at Beijing University on 28 May 1995, Professor Chen Pingyuan remembered the late Wang Yao telling him in personal communication that the level of foreign language skill of the Association members should be seriously doubted, since it was the fashion of the 1920s to claim knowledge of at least English even if one hardly understood the basics of that language. However, the level of knowledge is not at issue here.

80. Here, I am assuming that members are listed in chronological order. Although this is merely an assumption, there are several circumstances that make it highly likely. The incomplete second list of members (see above) is structured in the same way as the first list (name, style, place of origin, foreign languages) but has an extra column mentioning the year of joining the Association, which shows that members are numbered in chronological order; members on the lower half of the list are younger; no other ordering principle can be detected (except for the 12 founders, who of course “joined” on the same day, and are listed according to age).

81. The “Report on Association Affairs” from 01 1921Google Scholar mentions that 21 people were present at the meeting, but only 20 are in the picture, including a certain Yang Weiye, whose name does not appear on the membership list.

82. WXYJHZL, p. 677.Google Scholar

83. Xin, Bing, “Guanyu wenxue yanjiu hui” (“About the Literary Association”), Zhongguo xiandai wenxue yanjiu congkan (Journal for the Study of Modern Chinese Literature), No. 2 (1992), p. 31.Google Scholar

84. This result was acquired by checking the 74 names against a “top 50” of most prolific contributors to Association magazines and The Short Story Monthly between 1921 and 1925Google Scholar, drawn up by Yi, Shu in his “The Literary Association and its members,” pp. 51–52Google Scholar. This “top 50” is not entirely accurate, since Shu's statistics do not include the Literary Association Series, whereas they do include The Short Story Monthly, which was not really an Association organ. However, even without reference to Shu's statistics, a look at the Appendix makes it clear that the largest proportion of “anonimi” is in the first half of the list.

85. By-laws added to the original 1924 membership list, as seen in the Modern Chinese Literature Archives.

86. Saying this with certainty is made impossible by the conflicting information about Zhao Guangrong (Wang Fuquan? Wang Fuyan?; see above), who is member no. 75, i.e. between Xin, Bing, who joined in 1921Google Scholar, and Boxiang, Wang, who is said to have joined in 1923Google Scholar (see the short biography of Boxiang, Wang in WXYJHZL, p. 21).Google Scholar

87. Jingshen, Zhao, Reminiscing About the Literary Scene, pp. 153, 161.Google Scholar

88. Most sources mention Bing Xin and Gu Yiqiao as the only two living members. The information about Chen Xueping was provided to me by Gu Yiqiao in correspondence. I have been unable to contact Chen Xueping.

89. Name mistakenly printed as Geng Yizhi in the 1992 reprint of the membership list.

90. Name mistakenly printed as Xia Gaizun in the 1992 reprint.

91. The name Chen Rongyi is the result of a printing error and should read Chen Shouyi. In an interview with the editors of WXYJHZL (WXYJHZL, pp. 855–57Google Scholar), Liu Simu lists nine instead of ten members of the Guangzhou branch. He mentions neither Chen Rongyi, nor no. 120 Chen Shourong, but only Chen Shouyi, whom he remembers as having been an assistant professor at the Chinese department of Lingnan University, who later went to the United States. This is indeed correct. Chen Shouyi (Ch'ên Shou-yi) was Professor of Chinese Culture at Pamona College. In 1961 he published Chinese Literature: A Historical Introduction. In the preface to that book (p. viii), the author thanks his brother, Professor Shao Wing Chan of Stanford University. I assume that Shao Wing Chan is member no. 120 Chen Shourong.