This paper intends to explore a question in the history of ideology through discussing the ideological expression infarmers’mutual assistance and cooperation:How is that kind of cooperation in the middle of the 20th century comprehended in the revolutionary context of contemporary China? What did that idealized social practice designed for such cooperation look like,what kind of ideology did it express,and what logic did it follow? What situations in the rural areas were caused by bringing the ideology and logic into effect? What kind of transformation happened? What kind of paradox appeared during the transformation? I chose Cultivating Millet Log (Zhonggu Ji )to be my target of analysis, a novel written by the contemporary Chinese revolutionary fictionist Liu Qing,who is well-known for his stories of the cooperation process in rural China. Firstly,the paper explains why Liu Qing’s novel can by regarded as a subject of studying the history of ideology by examining the author’s creative ideology and methods based on socialist realism.Secondly,the paper analyzes Liu Qing’s novel Cultivating Millet Log (Zhonggu Ji )that was fabricated on the theme of peasants ’ activities for mutual assistance and cooperation. According to the action topics related to the ideology and practice of mutual assistance/corporation as described in the novel,the author analyzes the logics and mechanisms for the formation and transformation of this ideological construction. There are two major findings.First,in the mainstream ideological context of political and class analysis at that time,the strategy of “getting organized”intended to improve productive efficiency actually hit hard on the primary productive force,namely,the middle peasants,which in turn disparaged the rural economic ethics that had been functioning as the “element to stimulate labor”in the productive activities of the rural laborers.Second,during the practice of replacing “for the personal interest”with the idealisticmorality of“for the public interest,”the hidden logic to have “the government”replace“the public”was carried out,which consequently led to a new “differential mode of association”that centered around “government-as-agency.”Formation of the “organizational mode of association”was thus obstructed.%本研究试图通过有关农民互助合作的意识形态表达来探讨这样一个社会观念史问题：合作化在20世纪中叶的中国革命语境中究竟是如何被理解的，它们体现着什么思想观念，遵循了怎样的逻辑，其理念化的构想具体是如何展开的，且在乡村社会中造成了什么样的局面，结果发生了怎样的转换并形成了哪些悖论？笔者选择以描写中国农村合作化历程而著名的当代作家柳青的小说《种谷记》作为分析对象，基于文本分析的视角来透析在其作品中所建构的当时行动主体有关互助合作的理想追求及其实践，从而分析这一理想建构发生转换的逻辑和机制。本文主要的研究结论有以下两点：(1)在政治和阶级分析话语的主导下，原本旨在为提高生产效率而进行的“组织起来”的努力却贬损了乡村中的重要生产主体---中农，同时也使得向来对乡村劳动者的生产活动发挥着“激励劳动的因素”功能的乡村经济伦理开始式微；(2)在以“为公”取代“为私”的理想道德实践中，隐含着以“公家”取代“众人”的逻辑转换；进而形成了以“公家-代理人”为中心的新“差序格局”，由此阻碍了团体格局的形成。
展开▼
