New York Times Book Review, by Jonathan Mirsky
The Great Chinese Famine,
1958-1962
by Yang Jisheng (translated by Stacy Mosher and Guo Jian), 629 pp., Farrar, Straus & Giroux. $35.
In the summer of 1962, China’s president,
Liu Shaoqi, warned Mao Zedong that “history will record the role you and I
played in the starvation of so many people, and the cannibalism will also be
memorialized!” Liu had visited Hunan, his home province as well as Mao’s, where
almost a million people died of hunger. Some of the survivors had eaten dead
bodies or had killed and eaten their comrades. In “Tombstone,” an eye-opening
study of the worst famine in history, Yang Jisheng concludes that 36 million
Chinese starved to death in the years between 1958 and 1962, while 40 million
others failed to be born, which means that “China’s total population loss
during the Great Famine then comes to 76 million.”
Yang, who was born in 1940, is a well-known
veteran journalist and a Communist Party member. Before I quote the following
sentence, remember that a huge portrait of Chairman Mao still hangs over the
main gate into Beijing’s Forbidden City and can be seen from every corner of
Tiananmen Square, where his embalmed body lies in an elaborate mausoleum.
Despite this continued public veneration, Yang looks squarely at the real
chairman: “In power, Mao became immersed in China’s traditional monarchal
culture and Lenin and Stalin’s ‘dictatorship of the proletariat.’ . . . When
Mao was provided with a list of slogans for his approval, he personally added
one: ‘Long Live Chairman Mao.’ ” Two years ago, in an interview with the
journalist Ian Johnson, Yang remarked that he views the famine “as part of the
totalitarian system that China had at the time. The chief culprit was Mao.”
From the early 1990s, Yang writes, he began
combing normally closed official archives containing confidential reports of
the ravages of the famine, and reading accounts of the official killing of
protesters. He found references to cannibalism and interviewed men and women
who survived by eating human flesh.
Chinese statistics are always overwhelming,
so Yang helps us to conceptualize what 36 million deaths actually means. It is,
he writes, “450 times the number of people killed by the atomic bomb dropped on
Nagasaki” and “greater than the number of people killed in World War I.” It
also, he insists, “outstripped the ravages of World War II.” While 40 to 50
million died in that war, it stretched over seven or eight years, while most
deaths in the great Chinese famine, he notes, were “concentrated in a six-month
period.” The famine occurred neither during a war nor in a period of natural
calamity. When mentioned in China, which is rarely, bad weather or Russian
treachery are usually blamed for this disaster, and both are knowledgeably
dismissed by Yang.
The most staggering and detailed chapter in
Yang’s narrative relates what happened in Xinyang Prefecture, in Henan
Province. A lush region, it was “the economic engine of the province,” with a
population in 1958 of 8.5 million. Mao’s policies had driven the peasants from
their individual small holdings; working communally, they were now forced to
yield almost everything to the state, either to feed the cities or — crazily —
to increase exports. The peasants were allotted enough grain for just a few
months. In Xinyang alone, Yang calculates, over a million people died.
Mao had pronounced that the family, in the
new order of collective farming and eating, was no longer necessary. Liu
Shaoqi, reliably sycophantic, agreed: “The family is a historically produced
phenomenon and will be eliminated.” Grain production plummeted, the communal
kitchens collapsed. As yields dived, Zhou Enlai and other leaders, “the falcons
and hounds of evil,” as Yang describes them, assured Mao that agricultural
production had in fact soared. Mao himself proclaimed that under the new
dispensation yields could be exponentially higher. “Tell the peasants to resume
eating chaff and herbs for half the year,” he said, “and after some hardship
for one or two or three years things will turn around.”
A journalist reporting on Xinyang at the
time saw the desperation of ordinary people. Years later, he told Yang that he
had witnessed a Party secretary — during the famine, cadres were well fed —
treating his guests to a local delicacy. But he knew what happened to people
who recorded the truth, so he said nothing: “How could I dare to write an
internal reference report?” Indeed. Liu Shaoqi confronted Mao, who remembered
all slights, and during the Cultural Revolution he was accused of being a
traitor and an enemy agent. Expelled from the Party, he died alone, uncared
for, anonymous.
Of course, “Tombstone” has been banned in
China, but in 2008 it was published in Hong Kong in two mighty volumes. Pirated
texts and Internet summaries soon slipped over the border. This English
version, although substantial, is roughly half the size of the original. Its
eloquent translators, Stacy Mosher and Guo Jian, say their aim, like the
author’s, is to “present the tragedy in all its horror” and to render Yang’s
searching analysis in a manner that is both accessible to general readers and
informative for specialists. There is much in this readable “Tombstone” I
needed to know.
Yang writes that one reason for the book’s
title is to establish a memorial for the uncle who raised him like a son and
starved to death in 1959. At the time a devout believer in the Party and
ignorant of the extent of what was going on in the country at large, Yang felt
that everything, no matter how difficult, was part of China’s battle for a new
socialist order. Discovering official secrets during his work as a young
journalist, he began to lose his faith. His real “awakening,” however, came
after the 1989 Tiananmen massacre: “The blood of those young students cleansed
my brain of all the lies I had accepted over the previous decades.” This is
brave talk. Words and phrases associated with “Tiananmen” remain blocked on
China’s Internet.
Nowadays, Yang asserts, “rulers and
ordinary citizens alike know in their hearts that the totalitarian system has
reached its end.” He hopes “Tombstone” will help banish the “historical amnesia
imposed by those in power” and spur his countrymen to “renounce man-made
calamity, darkness and evil.” While guardedly hopeful about the rise of democracy,
Yang is ultimately a realist. Despite China’s economic and social
transformation, this courageous man concludes, “the political system remains
unchanged.” “Tombstone” doesn’t directly challenge China’s current regime, nor
is its author part of an organized movement. And so, unlike the Nobel Peace
Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, Yang Jisheng is not serving a long prison sentence.
But he has driven a stake through the hearts of Mao Zedong and the party he
helped found.
Jonathan Mirsky is a journalist and historian
specializing in China.
No comments:
Post a Comment
My blog is for vulnerable communication from my heart, mind, and spirit, meant to touch readers who are passionate about creativity, art, life, and cultures.... Nastiness and personal attack are expressions of bitterness, not meaningful communication. The internet drowns in negativity, but not this site....Thoughtful criticism, however, is not negative, but an affirmation of ideals, hopes, and caring. Positive comments are more useful if they are not meant for my ego, but to share compassion and love....Thanks for reading, feeling, and sharing.