UNDERSTANDING CHINA WITH JEAN FRANCOIS BILLETER
When one talks about western thought and eastern thought
One necessarily refers to caricatures
To simplifications that ....
... that are void of any intellectual merit
but they are ideological constructions
So, they have played a great role in terms of perception
And it is obvious that there are differences
But there are not only differences
between the "West" and the "East"
There are already so many differences inside each tradition
In fact, it is the China of the 19th and 20th century
that had to...
that had to redefine itself
For the bigger part, it redefined itself in contrast with the West
A certain idea of the West
So this discourse is still very general in China
This generality is not specific to Francois Jullien's work
Besides, his work took place in China
and he reimported it back to Europe
He is also...
To this, should be added that in the philosophical field
a very compelling idea
which was amplified by Heidegger
that philosophy is an invention of the West only
that the West is so noble to have invented philosophy
Philosophy couldn't exist elsewhere
Because it comes from Greece
And Greece only
That is also an ideology
I totally reject that conception of philosophy
which caused a lot of damage
And which continues to obsess not only many Chinese intellectuals
but also many sinologists
Can you explain your disagreement with Francois Jullien?
Basically, it is really a matter of method
But it's not just that, I'd say it is also...
... a difference in the tasks that we choose to undertake
I think that we can summarize his work saying that
he delineates, a priori, an essential difference between Chinese and Western thought
And then he attempts to demonstrate this difference
But in my opinion this demonstration is invalidated by...
... it has a weakness
in that he selects from each side the elements
which appear to be opposed to each other
and which go to reinforce his initial assumption
There, against...
I indicate that in my opinion
This way of speaking about China
has bad effects on public opinion
Personally I prefer a different method
which consists in saying
that human societies all possess common characteristics
So we have to start from there
Because it is from this point
that we can start to understand and to compare them...
... to reveal the relation they have to each other
And when we proceed in this manner
the differences will become manifest anyhow
No need to actively seek them out, they become obvious
And when we proceed in this manner
Westeners can become more knowledgeable about China
which allows them first to better understand it
and also to develop a common understanding of historical phenomena
By "common", I mean between Chinese and Western intellectuals
Which is very important for me
There is a certain vision of China, commonly held within China
which in fact doesn't resonate with the West at all
which has no significance for them
It has significance for the Chinese
It's a kind of monologue that China has with itself
But it has no significance for Westerners
In my opinion we have to take liberties when studying Chinese history...
-not only Chinese history, we need to approach all history in another way-
so Chinese history can be meaningful for Westerners too
So these are really in-depth problems
"The monologue that China has with itself?"
Sinology is a young science
Well, French jesuits have done important work on it for a long time
But in universities, it's a very young science
If we compare our knowledge of China
with our knowledge, in the West, of Greek and Latin Antiquity or the Middle Ages
in comparison, our knowledge of China is very limited
When contemporary sinology started to develop very recently
I would say in the second half of the 20th century...
...let say during the entirety of the 20th century
People had to start with what was realizable
That is to say to listen to what the Chinese had to say about their own tradition
So, basically, they translated and transmitted the vision that the Chinese had of themselves
for the Western public
It was the first task to be undertaken
But we have to surpass this
What I call 'the monologue that China has with itself'...
is not necessarily the best way for us Westerners to understand China
We need to have our own understanding
-we need move on from this stage-
which will necessarily be different in nature
But the Chinese have a conception of their own traditions and of themselves
that is so strong and so coherent, that it leaves a clear impression
And...
It's easy to think that
what the Chinese say about China
is the end of the story, the final truth
We can only conform and adopt their point of view
But I think that we can do something else
It doesn't mean that we are going to criticize, attack, doubt...
... or deconstruct their view
No, it's not about that,
It's about having a better understanding
So what can we do to understand better?
Well!
Well for example my work on Zhuangzi is a contribution to this
It is a very tiny contribution
But at least on the level of methodology
I detach myself...
I approach the text detached from the centuries of interpretations by Chinese commentators
And I discover texts that suddenly have a complete different meaning
from what the Chinese commentators have interpreted
That is an example
But we can do this in many other fields too
Can you explain your method of translating?
In the 'Lessons on Zhuangzi' and the other studies I wrote about Zhuangzi
I think I explain very clearly what I do and why I do it
It starts with the conviction that
knowledge of ancient classic texts is very difficult for the French reader
and they have to be made aware of the difficulties I face myself
I must tell them what these difficulties are
and how I have overcome them
Instead of only delivering the finished product
which they have to accept without thinking
When I translate, I explain my method
I say that I translate in a certain way
And sometimes I demonstrate with a specific example
so people can understand the way I translate
This is why in 'Studies on Zhuangzi', which has not been translated into Chinese
in some places, I show that we need a multiple translation
I start with a literal translation of the text in Chinese
But the literal translation doesn't say much
and sometimes it's not even understandable for a French reader
So I have to retranslate this first translation a second time
And sometimes even a third time
So there are...
At the university, some sinologists may be upset
and say that I take liberties that are...
They say that I translate carelessly
I don't agree, because I show each step of my process
And if I have distorted anything
Please feel free to point it out to me
Because in my opinion, I have translated and retranslated
and retranslated until it becomes perfectly understandable in French
And if at any point I have distorted or left something out
then feel free to let me know
All the meaning of the original sentence in Chinese is still there
it is preserved without changes in the final product
This view takes away from the idea that a translation is single action
In my opinion it's a process of many stages
At least with languages so distinct as ancient Chinese and modern French
What I did in the case of the Zhuangzi
is not necessarily applicable to other texts
I think that each text has its own specific problems
And we should always know the target audience of our translations
Depending on the public we target, we'll choose different methods of translation
First of all, my focus was
on certain texts from the Zhuangzi
And then my goal was to show how interesting their meaning can be
for Western readers in general and non-specialists
Because to translate for sinologists is one thing
They always know more or less and...
There are already some commmon assumptions understood
When one translates for non-specialists
- which was the goal I had in mind in this case
In order to raze to the ground the ivory tower in which sinologists enjoy refuge
One must approach things from a different angle
This is why in the interpreation of these texts
I often make references that educated non-specialists should be familiar with
For example, in 'Lessons on Zhuangzi'
at one point I talk about the concept of freedom according to Luther
This is quite unusual in an interpretation of Zhuangzi
But it seemed to me that there was something relevant here
It's one example among many
It's a way of referring to the cultural framework of my readers
to give them access to certain aspects of Zhuangzi's thought
Have you met with any problems whilst translating?
Let's talk about the intellectuals now
Because more wordly people
like engineers, artists or musicians
understand each other very well
They understand each other perfectly
It is mostly philosophers who don't understand each other
Of course!
Because philosophers do not realize in general
the extent to which they depend on the language they use
Thus they are all caught up in their own language
And... They have difficulty in understanding each other
I happened to tell some philosophers in Europe this experience
Philosophy pretends to search for the universal
But the confinment of each philosopher in his own language
causes philosophers to have the most difficulties communicating across cultural borders
When I came here two years ago
for a seminar at the Academia Sinica
about this short book 'Lessons on Zhuangzi'
We spent almost two days and two nights in discussion
And it was very difficult to understand each other
Because there was a problem with the words we used
This afterwards inspired me to write another short book which hasn't been translated yet
I asked myself: how is it that between the Chinese intellectuals and me, a Westerner
there was so much so many difficulty in understanding the meaning of the words that other people use
I thought that there was a problem
And it made me think about it
So it is interesting to consider how the meaning of a word comes to be
Especially important words in philosophy
For example the word "qi"
I think that it is an act of integration
That is to say...
... I take into account different elements of my experience
like sensations, perceptions, recollections
And I gather them
and make a kind of synthesis
And I have the need to use a word word for this
I choose a word, I attribute this to the word
And then I have at the same time the notion, which is a synthesis
and the word
When we learn a foreign language
or when a child learns his mother tongue
He has to do this with words, he has to make a synthesis
He has to find it by himself
he uses elements of his experience and gathers them under this word
and these experiences constitute the meaning of this word
I think that...
I took the liberty of
Calling this faculty of integration that we all have
'imagination'
So I give the word 'imagination' a new meaning
I say that imagination is not our faculty of imagining things
... Well, we also have that faculty
When I say 'imagination' I am referring to this precise connotation
of our faculty for integration and synthesis
To put together different elements of our experience
to make them one thing
and to put this thing in relation to a word
Which kind of ideas did Zhuangzi inspire in you?
To take the 'Lessons on Zhuangzi' as an example
It's this idea that...
We are first of all engaged in activity
We are naturally active
When we say the body is dust, the body is matter
this is an abstract idea
At first we are active beings
Even when we do nothing, we are engaged in some form of activity
And this activity has different rhythms
Actually there is a word in French, 'régime', which expresses it well
So there are different kinds of activity
And we go from one to another
I think that...
In Zhuangzi, there are very interesting descriptions of that
And they allow us to focus on this and discuss it
We also see that in certain rhythms our activity becomes spontaneously efficient
when in other rhythms, it is difficult, sometimes even impeded
It is sometimes painful
Sometimes it leads to efficient actions and at times to completely unefficient actions
Zhuangzi puts it very well
By using two concepts: 'Tian' and 'Ren'
These two words seem very simple at first sight
'Tian' is the sky and also what is natural
Not what is natural in today's scientific sense
but what comes naturally, what is spontaneous
And 'Ren' is what is human
In Zhuangzi's mind, it is what is artificial, what is calculated
Thus Zhuangzi shows that...
... the characteristic peculiar to man is to engage in activities that are calculated and intentional
and which very often lead to mistakes and failure
I think that...
When I am asked if Zhuangzi has invented concepts
I say that there is a pair of concepts which he invented, to my knowledge
And it is this couple 'Tian and Ren'
I call them the Celestial and the Human
These are two translations
But I explain it at length in 'Lessons on Zhuangzi'
how interesting these two concepts are
They describe different rhythms of activity
I believe this is an original topic for discussion
which was inspired in me by reading Zhuangzi
Subtitles by C. Phiv