At the time, this was a question open to discussion. To conclude on the basis of the present situation resulting from China's 1945 recovery of Taiwan that that was an inevitable outcome is just too simple.

     This "dual nationalistic structure" did not only exist during the period of Japanese rule, for, in actuality, it still exits to this day; and this is one of the sources of internal tension on a Taiwan now under the jurisdiction of the Republic of China. In particular, the shadow of the February 28 Incident of 1947 simply will not go away. As for the struggle over independence or unification, beyond those causes stemming from the actual political situation, the "dual nationalistic structure" of the Taiwanese themselves is a problem that must be faced squarely.

     Literature often reflects the times, and the 1930s idea, full and complete, of a Taiwanese literature is retraced once more during the 1980s. This is no simple matter. Yeh Shih-t'ao concludes his "The Dual Nationalistic Structure of New Literature Writers" by saying:

     The answer to nationalistic division in Taiwanese literature lies in the history of post-war Taiwanese literature some forty years after the war.

This is a challenging issue which researchers of Taiwanese literature must confront.

     The Soviet-Russian literary critic Herzen gives his view on writers and artists:

     Poets and artists always imbue their true creations with a national character. Regardless of what they are creating, no matter what the goal or thought of their works is, or whether consciously or unconsciously, they are always manifesting some natural factors of national character. And such expression is always more profound and in sharper focus than in the history of the people themselves.

Within this dual structure of nationalism, Taiwanese writers have laid out the problems in many outstanding literary works, which await those who study Taiwanese literature to deal with and discover.

  Prev   |12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21