1

Chien Chung-shu wrote a very interesting book, Writing from the Edge of Life, which took a sober look at the world in a way that was both bitter and humorous. Lu Keng-a journalist in mainland China-has recently published his 600-page Collection of Memories and Regrets, putting the story of his feelings and enthusiasm for life down in a way which cannot fail to move the reader. This book can accurately be described as being written from the edge of history. Just as Pu Shao-fu said, the records kept by a news journalist are like froth floating in the long river of history. Part of history, they "reflect the times and are an indispensable witness to them." (1)

Describing Lu's book as history's "froth" is not disrespectful, especially coming from a friend of Lu's like Pu Shao-fu. After all, not many people get to leave any mark at all on history. For over fifty years Lu has pursued news and made news, and on a number of occasions has also been sucked into the power struggle between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party. This man and his deeds are, of course, legendary. His memoirs are not only written from the edge of history; sometimes they are actually written from the center of history.

Sima Wenwu was right when he said that the struggle between the KMT and the CCP destroyed the living space of independent journalism. (2) Reading books like Lu Keng's Collection of Memories and Regrets, Hsiao Chien's The Traveler Without a Map (his memoirs), and the memoirs of Liu Binyan and Bo Yang, the reader cannot help but be moved to tears as the books vividly describe the rottenness of vicious dictatorial regimes. The reader can see how the bloody-handed rulers squashed human rights underfoot and suppressed press freedoms.

Perhaps people who have lived afterwards can forgive their brutal stupidity for doctrinaire reasons, but we can't lightly forget the lessons of history. The experiences of the four authors were different, but have some similarities: Leftist and rightist regimes sought to destroy a free spirit and use the people. The individual may be helpless against the trends of the times, but the independent character can still leave a mark on history.

I have always believed that learning from example is better for molding a journalist's strength of character and courage than being taught. In the past I have read books on newspaper history, such as 100 Years of the New York Times (translated by He Yu-heng), which I have really identified with. However, there was always a feeling that we were separated by culture. Today, at last, Chinese journalists have begun to write about their history of hardship. The four books I mentioned tell us something about the trials endured by journalists on both sides of the Taiwan Strait under harsh dictatorships, and should be recommended for careful reading by people working in the news media today and in the future.

We might look at Lu's book by comparing it to the others. The memoirs of Hsiao Chien, who is a warm and placid person, are lively and detailed, but fail in one respect:

He decided to give up everything he had overseas and return to the "new China." For this he had to "eat bitterness" for decades and even had to give up writing for years. Who would have thought that in the last chapter of his book he would tell how he is without complaint or regret. We should absolutely respect the individual's choices and feelings. But doesn't this statement prompt the reader to wonder exactly what kind of message the book is trying to convey, and why he bothered to relate the troubles he endured? Putting it frankly, the main point of the book should be to examine the roots of dictatorship. Why was it necessary to mention the complaints and regrets of the individual? I personally appreciate Bo Yang's approach-The secret policeman who tortured him can be forgiven, but it is absolutely necessary to carry out a thorough diagnosis of the evils of the KMT martial-law system.

Hsiao Chien's book shows a common weakness of Chinese men of letters: they are conceited and self-pitying. They have a deep-seated fear of exposing their own and society's scars, with the result that their memoirs often leave the past in the past. On an individual level, perhaps reluctance to remember bad things is a virtue, but on a historical level this is nothing more than evasion of responsibility. These types of memoirs are, of course, not true to the facts. Minor things can be treated casually, but important things cannot be blurred. Fortunately, Lu Keng does not have this fault.

In 1985 Lu Keng interviewed Hu Yaobang in Zhongnanhai. Hu apologized for the treatment that the Communist Party had meted out to Lu. Lu magnanimously replied that the troubles of the individual in tumultuous times are of no consequence. His memoirs "seek truth from facts" as far as possible. They are also very interesting. Luckily Lu has not ruined the work by making superficial additions about his personal feelings about the past, which, in my opinion, would have detracted from the book. This criticism is perhaps a little harsh but what we want to know is not only the individual experiences of Hsiao Chien, Bo Yang, Liu Binyan or Lu Keng, but the bigger picture-the experiences of the tens of millions of people who lived through these times. If people always refuse to absorb the lessons of history, they deserve to make the same mistakes again.

I used the term "as far as possible" because Lu Keng depends on his astonishing memory for the contents of the book, unlike Li Rui's Memoirs of the Lushan Plenum, which was based on a diary and first-hand records. Fifty years on, most of the protagonists are dead, so they can't be called to provide evidence and there's no way of knowing to what degree to which Lu's memory is "selective," or which things, both good and bad, have become exaggerated by the passage of time. For journalists who have stared death in the face, this is unavoidable and something over which they have no control. We still sincerely thank Lu Keng for the trouble he has gone to preserve history. His life of adversity spent in the pursuit of press freedom, mixing in the ranks of the powerful and in different political camps, is written from the edge of history and sometimes from the center of history. As such it is very worthy of emulation and contemplation by everyone, including myself.

2

In the 1960s, when I was at university in Taiwan, Lu Keng was in prison again in Kunming. His views had gotten him into trouble when he publicly called for the establishment of independent newspapers in response to Chairman Mao's call to freely air views. He was accused of being a rightist who was "viciously attacking the party." His fate was unknown to the outside world. Two teachers of mine said in his praise that they had never known such a talented chief reporter, but because of the nature of the times they did not say much more. Afterwards, I surreptitiously visited the library to read News World (Xinwen Tiandi) where I discovered Pu Shao-fu's "Lu Keng," letters sent to Pu and Ding Zhongjiang by Lu, and Pu's severing of relations declaration. Reading Lu's book I found that these letters date from around 1956, when Lu had been released from prison for the first time and was a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference in Yunnan Province, serving, in his own words, as "a trumpeter for the Communist United Front" advocating a third "KMT-CCP United Front." (3)

In 1978 I began to teach at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. One day I noticed, to my surprise, a short report in the South China Morning Post about Lu's arrival in Hong Kong. Later, I had an opportunity to meet him. Like many other people, I could not but wonder whether this lively, cheerful man, who treated younger people like old friends without a hint of a generation gap, could really be the same Lu who almost lost his head to Chiang Kai-shek and who was subjected to 22 years of imprisonment by the Communists

Afterwards, I was lucky enough to work with him. He enthusiastically related past events which couldn't fail to move anyone hearing them. Then he went on to establish the magazine Bai Xing (The People) in Hong Kong with Hu Juren and then Huayu Kuaibao (Chinese Express) in New York, which saw him both reporting and providing editorials. In 1985 he interviewed Hu Yaobang, engaging Hu in a veritable verbal sword fight. The interview was later one of the publicly stated reasons that Hu fell from grace. After Tiananmen he helped Xu Jiatun flee to the US, which won him a place on the PRC's black list. Whatever he does always causes a stir and the book relates these stories in detail. In this book the memories mainly concern his professional life while the regrets are personal. He has always been committed to journalism but, in complete contrast, he has been a rover in his relationships with women. I only dare touch upon the parts of the book dealing with work in journalism. As for private male-female matters, these are best left to Lu, his women and his god.

For almost 20 years I have been a friend of Lu's. I have heard his stories many times in different locations. Reading his memoirs, although they are still vivid and moving, it has to be said that they come too late. Of course, late is better than never. It is ten years since martial law and press restrictions were lifted in Taiwan. Where is the Chiang dictatorship that Lu faced then? I am afraid that readers younger than myself will have no memories of the white terror and will treat the book just as idle anecdotes, not appreciating that it is the sacrifice of others that gave them the freedom that they enjoy today. Press freedoms were won through the efforts of a succession of people. They came with difficulty and they should be protected. This is true for Taiwan, and isn't it the same for mainland China and Hong Kong?

What would be the situation if this book had come out 15 years ago? Firstly, it would have fanned the flames of the non-KMT democratic movement and would have continued the liberal spirit expressed by Lei Chen and Yin Haikuang in Free China Fortnightly. However, if this had been the case, Lu's relationship with the KMT would have become more difficult and the book would have been unlikely to have seen the light of day in Taiwan. Secondly, Lu would probably not have had the chance to interview Hu Yaobang. This wouldn't have changed Hu's fate, but there would not be such a good record of his frankness and thoughts for posterity.

When he left mainland China at the end of the 1970s Lu threw himself wholeheartedly into journalistic work, making every second count as if making up for the 22 wasted years in prison. He had little interest in something as lacking in urgency as his memoirs. At the time, although he criticized Mao for being a dictator, he would also on occasion sing the praises of Socialism-of course, all that is needed is solid evidence to prove that socialism is superior. If Lu had published his book before the avalanche of Cultural Revolution stories, his memoirs would certainly have made a bigger impact in the international market. However, at that time I believe his thinking was not as liberated as it is now.

3

Lu Keng chose news reporting as his life's work, but what kind of journalist is he exactly? He never forgets to make friends, establishing contacts all over. While in prison he did his best to find out everything about the fall of Yunnan. Faced with death he was still able to think of the headline "Thousands gather for execution of Lu Keng."

Hu Juren calls Lu a "tiger journalist." Sima Wenwu says that he is like a "galloping mustang" and Tang Degang that he is a hero who treats his work with more respect than anyone else. Yu Dongbin says that he will not surrender in the face of force. Lu says himself that he is a "liberal" or a "democratic individualist." (4) I believe that Lu is primarily a Confucianist, influenced by Mencius' ideas of the noble spirit. Secondly, he is a liberal. Of course, the connection between the two requires more detailed academic research. His strength of character did not need to come from books. He was deeply influenced by Yu Youren, and wanted to let newspapers be the "new life force challenging corrupt power," destroying the old, establishing the new and pleading on behalf of the people. (5)

Lu had a successful youth and before he was thirty years old he had gained the position of deputy editor and chief reporter at the Central Daily News-the KMT party paper-in the capital of Nanjing. In 1947, the paper revealed the Kong-Song corruption scandal which made headline news in China and overseas, and infuriated Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang ordered that the source of the news should be found, but Lu refused to budge and acted to protect his journalists. In a face to face meeting with Chiang, Lu bravely criticized the corruption of the country's leaders and managed to defuse Chiang's anger with great skill. This could not have been achieved by a pedant and was a glorious page in the history of news media. (The idea of protecting sources was a Western liberal idea, not a part of Chinese culture.)

The fact that Chiang didn't have Lu executed was in part due to consideration of the international response to such a move. But also, as a democrat of the period, Chu Anping, said at the time, struggling for press freedoms with the KMT was a matter of "how much," but if the Communists were to gain power then it would be a problem of "are there any at all." In the end Chu was persecuted to death for criticizing the Communists for their monopolization of power. If Lu had been faced with Mao Zedong, would he have come out alive?

I once asked the ex-editor of the People's Daily, Hu Jiwei-who went to Yenan to make revolution and spent his whole life considering problems within the parameters of the party newspaper-where the democratic ideas that he had in later life came from? He said, laughingly, that as an unadorned Marxist he knew just one thing: that the party and the state must treat the people well. Democracy should give the people what they like and avoid what they don't like. It does not require a deep theoretical grounding and its essence can be experienced from life. Lu Keng and Hu Jiwei belong on the right and left of the political spectrum but have reached the same destination-the idea that the needs of the people should be put first-by different routes.

Lu's trademark is imprisonment. Much of his adult life has been spent in prison. He was almost killed by the KMT and then was imprisoned by the Communists for 22 years. Released from prison, as soon as he went overseas he came back to life. He found a place on both Taiwan's and mainland China's black lists, which in his own words is something "very unusual." (6)

Lu has been both a prisoner and a guest of the governments on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, but at the end of the day he is still an independent journalist. He quotes Zhang Jiluan: "If a journalist hasn't been in prison he can't be a good journalist," and Chen Shewo's "Only through experiencing prison can true steel be expressed." (7) In terms of his fearlessness in the face of might, he is similar to the liberal Yin Haikuang

I hope that his eulogizing of prison is just an excuse to console himself. Looking at the situation in more politically developed countries, journalists need not go to prison. In earlier days, China's social structure was simple and the press was subservient to politics. In his own words Lu Keng's natural character traits are a fearless propensity to mind other people's business and have confidence in the rightness of his own ideas (8), so he was destined to play with the fire of politics.

Politics is dangerous and it is also easily used by people; there are many examples of this. For example, when Lu inquired as to whether Hu Shih would stand for President he didn't know that he had fallen into a trap set by Chiang Kai-shek as part of an intra-party struggle. He established close relations with Yen Hsi-shan. The positive and negative effects of this relationship canceled each other out. In 1948 Yen rescued him from a KMT prison (his crime was correctly forecasting in print where the Communists would cross the Yangzi River). The following year when he visited Kunming to pick up his family, the Communists suspected that he was sent by Yen Hsi-shan on a political mission, and this almost cost him his life.

Force perhaps can't bring Lu to his knees, but he can be moved by the demands of friendship. His commitment to friends led him, when helping Xu Jiatun, to flee to the US, to cross the line from journalism to politics. In these cases he seems to have become more involved than is usual for a journalist.

There is an art to maintaining an appropriate distance between journalism and politics, and there is no fixed rule as to what is appropriate. In principle, the relationship should be close enough to allow journalists to gain the confidence of their subjects so they can acquire exclusive stores, but also with enough of a sober distance to allow independence to be maintained. In any case, being too close is undesirable. After experiencing so many trials and tribulations in his life Lu Keng has arrived at the conclusion that "journalism is journalism, politics is politics. It is best not to fall into the political morass." (9) Those who breach this principle, in serious cases will lose their lives, while the luckier ones only lose their reputations, their fates serving as a warning to others. In 1976 I had a chance to interview Gerald Ford, who was the US president at that time. I asked him how he felt being pursued and mauled by the press and he said: "I know they have a job to do, I hope they can understand that I have my job to do, and we can treat each other with respect." Clear separation of roles, defined powers and duties should govern the normal relationship between journalism and politics.

4

Lu Keng's difficulties mirror China's difficulties. The time he lived through was the time when Chinese journalism transformed from pure political discourse to semi-professionalism.

Two or three generations ago scholars used the press to enlighten the people and as a tool for national salvation, to comment on national affairs, to point out errors in politics and to mobilize the people. The most accomplished figures in this respect, like Wang Tao, Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao and Sun Yat-sen, all saw righting the wrongs of the world as their own business. They were highly knowledgeable and multi-talented, genuine Renaissance men. Today, those days are over and there are no more of these great figures.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the Chinese press began to be influenced by the West. The proportion of papers given over to news was continually increasing, and their development had reached a stage of maturity where news principles began to be developed. The principles of "no party affiliation, no personal bias, no blindness and no selling out" put forward by the Ta Kung Pao were actually similar to the Western press's concepts regarding the pursuit of objectivity and freedom of speech. Hsiao Chien's recollections show how Ta Kung Pao worked harder than other papers to develop news journalism in China. Zhang Jiluan exhorted himself "not to seek power, profit or fame." The Communists felt that the paper's criticism of the KMT was limited and that they actually were a big help to the KMT; however at various times they were criticized by both left and right. At the time, China's commerce and industry were depressed, society was simple, and transport was poor, so the Ta Kung Pao's circulation was limited, but its historical position has never been exceeded by any other paper since. It is understandable why old journalists like Xu Chucheng and Hsiao Chien are still nostalgic about the paper decades later.

When Lu Keng entered journalism, the social position of the journalist both in China and overseas was very low. Up to 30 years ago in Taiwan, journalists were still called "intellectual paupers." Basically, it was not the sort of career that the children of the rich and successful pursued. To our shame, research into the history of Chinese journalism is still a blank, which leaves us unable to understand the background, consciousness, class or social movements of the Chinese journalist.

However, I know that journalism depends on talent, not educational qualifications. All that is needed is talent. Moreover, journalism satisfies the romantic cravings of idealistic young people, so it has always been a fast route through which hard-up young people have participated in society and improved their lives. Hsiao Chien and Lu Keng's examples show that when there was nothing else, choosing journalism offered them a stage on which they could perform.

New York Times humorist Russell Baker once wrote self-mockingly that in 1947 (when he joined the paper) journalists were losers. Those that dreamed of money and rich wives all became doctors, lawyers or went into business. He could have been a professor; professors didn't earn much, but they had a high social position. In comparison, good families wouldn't let their daughter marry a journalist, such was their lowly social position. They were seen as a bunch of hard-drinking, foul-mouthed, smelly-clothed, debt-laden, unwelcome tramps. (10) In his book China Hands, Peter Rand writes: "In the early part of this century the sort of Americans who were attracted to China were, if not social misfits, at least loners and dreamers. Many well-known weirdoes in their ranks were journalists. This is not surprising as journalism has always attracted unconventional people." [Retranslated from Chinese.](11) This shows that journalism in the US has only in the last few decades become professional.

Ironically, the period of greatest freedom for the Chinese press was in the warlord period, and the places that offered the most freedom were the foreign concessions and colonies. Unfortunately, the liberal spirit of the Ta Kung Pao was unable to continue flourishing, and the press became a mouthpiece first for the KMT and then the Communists. The average political commentators at the time seemed to be engaged in political discourse, admonishing the leaders of the country and serving as a mouthpiece for the people but, in actual fact, they were passing judgment based on some simple Confucian ideas of morality. Even if they came from the lower reaches of rural society, after they changed their class they were not necessarily able to hear the cries of the people. They really had no channel through which to know of the people's needs and aspirations.

At the end of the 1940s, on the eve of the mainland's fall to the Communists, Lu Keng and his young colleagues were able to run the Central Daily News with an emphasis on the "Daily News" not "Central." They rapidly won a reputation for authoritative news reporting. Looking back it all seems unbelievable. Although Chiang Kai-shek was never able to assume total authority in China, when things were going well he did tolerate dissent; at the time a succession of papers sympathetic to the Communists sprang up. For example, in 1936 to 1939, Hu Jiwei published ten papers in Chengdu. When one was closed down another was started up. All that was needed was to register under a different name and the contents didn't even have to be changed.

However, when Chiang was having difficulties he would clamp down on debate with an iron fist. In the early days after the evacuation to Taiwan, before Chiang had consolidated his power, the Central Daily News was still fiercely objective and was frequently criticized by the government as being "a party paper that does not resemble a party paper." Afterwards, it gradually faded to become a paper with "all center, no daily news." It declined rapidly until the name was all that remained of its former self. After the KMT retreated to Taiwan they had nowhere else to go, and from 1949-1987 their repression of the press was even worse than it had been in China. However, the tyranny of the KMT was outstripped by that of the Communists. On a certain level, Lu Keng's memoirs provide testimony to this tragedy.

Today the free political environment, developed economy and diversified society in Hong Kong and Taiwan have allowed the media to break free from the shackles of the traditional strict authoritarian order and nurture a free and independent press. Today journalists are part of the salaried middle class, well trained, with stable lives. The improved social position means that they no longer have to write to please authority to ensure their livelihood. They also don't need to unrealistically regard all the troubles of the world as their responsibility. What is more important is doing their specialized job and allowing the free competition of the market to decide their success or failure. The market is not all powerful but the journalist should look to please the reading public. Thus they need to frequently look down, not always blindly look up.

I am not saying that the political discourse of traditional scholars was completely without merit or that a specialized division of labor is definitely more advanced; actually increased specialization also has its own dangers. Moreover, monopolization of the market is leading to the silencing of alternative opinions. The trend to a finer division of labor in society is inevitable and unstoppable. The problem faced is how to combine the lofty aims of the traditional scholar and the professional spirit of today. This is the best chance in the century and should not be missed.

5

After saying so much I will now return to the book itself. Lu Keng's friends say that he is both crude and refined. When he is refined, his writing is rich and he takes a macro and micro view of things. For example, the chapter that recounts his description of his face-to-face encounter with Chiang Kai-shek evokes the atmosphere of the time brilliantly.

However, at other times he is quite crude. For example, what type of person was Central Daily News Chief Editor Li Jingsun? What was his attitude to news? What struggles did he have? How was he dragged into the power struggle? (How did he become a scapegoat?) How was he persecuted? How did he feel? (He said that this was his punishment for misdeeds in another life and wouldn't allow his family to visit.) Although there are some disparate records in existence, his good friend Lu Keng should be able to tell us more. Lu mentions the differences of opinion among the journalists at News World (12), and his imprisonment as a rightist during the Cultural Revolution, but in no detail. The book's descriptions of sex lives in a Chinese prison and the sudden death of Chiang Wei-kuo's wife are completely out of sync with the tone of the book and are a clumsy attempt to titillate.

Of course the most important thing is still "significance"-after reading this 600-page work, apart from learning various anecdotes that can provide conversation topics, what enlightenment does the reader gain? Please excuse my nit-picking. I think that Lu Keng has said many things but seems to have failed to give enough explanation of their significance.

It is not that Lu Keng lacks the ability; rather, it must be that this was not his intention. He has written an academic thesis on Chiang Kai-shek's and Mao Zedong's control of the press and has revealed many things previously unknown. I want to know how he sees the ups and downs of the Chinese press over the past few decades; want him to tell us how journalists maintain their integrity during times of great change and stop being swept along with the flow; how the other journalists of his time were able, under great pressure, to reflect the needs of the people; how the press can maintain a reasonable relationship with those in power; and what he thinks the contribution of foreign media (including that of Hong Kong, Taiwan and North America) to China's democratization has been. Xu Jiatun said that Lu Keng "criticized Mao but not Deng." I think Lu is too interested in people and sometimes will underestimate the structural factors that can't be seen on the surface.

Hsiao Chien was full of admiration for the interviewing technique that Lu used when he interviewed Hu Yaobang. At first Lu was very polite, but then out of the blue he asked some incisive questions which gave the interviewee nowhere to hide. (13) Sima Wenwu said that Lu first allows his subjects to gallop off, then thinks of a way to rope them in, and the subjects say many things without realizing that they will probably regret them. (14) I agree with this assessment. His interview with Hu stole the thunder from the Italian journalist Falachi for her Deng interview.

Unfortunately, in his book Lu does not analyze this technique and we can only use the interview as original material without the help of his own explanation. This is undoubtedly a loss to Chinese journalism. As to Lu's interview with Hu being one of the expressed reasons why Hu fell, this was simply an excuse by the upper echelons of China's government-an "external expression of the inner party struggle."

In summary, this book is a blow-by-blow historical account written by "China's Number 1 Journalist." What other Chinese journalist has been through so much, been in so much trouble, eaten as much bitterness, or been more controversial? And who else at this age is still on the front line of news journalism? The answer is, of course, no one. If he hadn't delivered himself into the Communists' trap; if he hadn't spent 22 years in prison; if he hadn't been released because he was regarded as a United Front target; if he hadn't, because he was a United Front target, interviewed Hu; if he hadn't mixed with people from overseas on the left, right, and center of politics; what would this "tiger journalist" have become? There is no answer to this long line of ifs, and we can only speculate.

As well as sympathizing with the author, we should also give our respect.

Notes:

1. Lu Keng's Collection of Memories and Regrets, p.623

2. p.6

3. p.339

4. p.519

5. p.239

6. p.1

7. p.230

8. p.153

9. p.213

10. Growing Up, 1989, p.57

11. China Hands, 1995, p.21

12. Lu Keng's Collection of Memories and Regrets, p.471

13. p.456

14. p. 7

p.126

Title: Collection of Memories and Regrets

Author: Lu Keng

Publishers: China Times

Price: NT$450

p.128

If people always refuse to absorb the

lessons of history, they deserve to make the same mistakes again.

p.129

Reporters participate in and reflect their eras. Hsiao Chien, Bo Yang, and Lu Keng all were imprisoned for their work. Their stories are, to some extent, the stories of all Chinese who lived in those hard times.(photo by Pu Hua-chih)

p.130

Journalism is journalism, politics is

politics. It is best not to fall into the political morass.

p.132

Those days are over and there are no more of these great figures.

p.134

The trend to a finer division of labor in society is inevitable and unstoppable. The problem faced is how to combine the lofty aims of the traditional scholar and the professional spirit of today.

If people always refuse to absorb the lessons of history, they deserve to make the same mistakes again.

Reporters participate in and reflect their eras. Hsiao Chien, Bo Yang, and Lu Keng all were imprisoned for their work. Their stories are, to some extent, the stories of all Chinese who lived in those hard times. （photo by Pu Hua-chih）

Journalism is journalism, politics is politics. It is best not to fall into the political morass.

Those days are over and there are no more of these great figures.

The trend to a finer division of labor in society is inevitable and unstoppable. The problem faced is how to combine the lofty aims of the traditional scholar and the professional spirit of today.