Post-Mao China produced two parallel discourses on the human subject in the New Era (1976-1989). One was an autonomous, Enlightenment humanist self aimed at replacing the revolutionary paragon that had dominated under Mao. The other was a more problematic subject suffering from either a symbolic physical deformity or some kind of spiritual paralysis that undermines its apparent normalcy. How do we explain the stubborn presence, in the literature of the 1980s and 1990s, of this crippled agent who fails to realize the humanist autonomy envisioned by post-Mao theorists? What are the anxieties...
Post-Mao China produced two parallel discourses on the human subject in the New Era (1976-1989). One was an autonomous, Enlightenment humanist self...
Post-Mao China produced two parallel discourses on the human subject in the New Era (1976-1989). One was an autonomous, Enlightenment humanist self aimed at replacing the revolutionary paragon that had dominated under Mao. The other was a more problematic subject suffering from either a symbolic physical deformity or some kind of spiritual paralysis that undermines its apparent normalcy. How do we explain the stubborn presence, in the literature of the 1980s and 1990s, of this crippled agent who fails to realize the humanist autonomy envisioned by post-Mao theorists? What are the anxieties...
Post-Mao China produced two parallel discourses on the human subject in the New Era (1976-1989). One was an autonomous, Enlightenment humanist self...
