竹內實的中國文學思考與毛澤東觀之情感與理性──以文革為中心

Emotion and Reason in Takeuchi Minoru’s Reflections on Chinese Literature and Mao Zedong: Focusing on the Cultural Revolution

竹內實（1923-2013）是戰後日本著名的中國研究學者，主要關注中國現代文學，亦有多種與毛澤東（1893-1976）相關的著作。文革時期，日本的中國研究者對中國、文革、毛澤東思想的肯定或否定立場涇渭分明，既有對三者搖旗吶喊、全情投入的「文革禮讚派」，亦有極力否定它們的右派學者。與這些學者不同，竹內實於中國出生、成長，他一方面對中國抱有深厚的鄉土情、熱愛中國文學，又與毛澤東親身見過面，對毛澤東有敬畏之情，但另一方面，他強烈否定文革。他在情感上熱愛中國與毛澤東，在理性上反對文革，顯示了一個日本知識分子對中國的複雜心境。這種複雜心境反映在竹內的學問之上。竹內主要研究與翻譯中國現代文學，其學問、論述一方面體現了他對文學的洞見，另一方面流露了他對中國時陰時晴的發展之關心。本文以文革時期前後為討論中心，考察竹內實對中國文學與毛澤東的思考，除了發掘其學問之價值外，亦觀察當中情感的流動，窺探竹內實對現代中國、毛澤東在情感與理性兩方面的角力。竹內的例子展示了戰後日本，知識分子在面對中國時，如何在純粹肯定或否定的二元選擇外另闢蹊徑，開拓了理解中國的新途徑。

Takeuchi Minoru (1923-2013) was a renowned post-war Japanese scholar of Chinese studies, primarily focusing on modern Chinese literature and producing various works related to Mao Zedong (1893-1976). During the Cultural Revolution, Japanese scholars of China held distinct positions of affirmation or negation towards China, the Cultural Revolution, and Maoist ideology. There were those who fervently supported the three, often referred to as the“Cultural Revolution enthusiasts,”as well as right-wing scholars who vehemently denied their value. In contrast, Takeuchi was born and raised in China, which fostered a deep attachment to Chinese and literature. He had also met Mao, which instilled in him a sense of reverence. However, he strongly opposed the Cultural Revolution. His complex sentiments of affection towards China and Mao, coupled with his rejection of the Cultural Revolution, exemplified the intricate mindset of a Japanese intellectual towards China. This complexity is reflected in Takeuchi’s scholarly pursuits. Primarily studying and translating modern Chinese literature, his scholarship not only demonstrated his insights into literature but also revealed his concerns about China’s fluctuating development. Centering on the period surrounding the Cultural Revolution, this paper examines Takeuchi’s reflections on Chinese literature and his perceptions of Mao. Beyond uncovering the scholarly value of his work, it also explores the dynamics of emotional currents, shedding light on the tension between emotion and reason in his engagement with modern China and Mao. The case of Takeuchi illustrates how post-war Japanese intellectuals, when confronted with China, carved out alternative paths beyond the binary choices of simple affirmation or negation, thereby opening up new avenues for understanding China.