Article body

1. Introduction

The area of translation and activism has attracted a burgeoning body of scholarship in recent years, covering topics such as activist translation communities (Boéri 2008), translation and language mediation (Taronna 2016) as well as translation and queer activism (Baldo 2020). However, despite the growing interest in activist translation, few studies (Cheung 2010b; Ni 2013; Gao 2020) have been carried out on translation and activism in the context of China. Tymoczko (2010), for example, suggests that the concept of activism can shed new light on the translators in China at the turn of the twentieth century. The present study fills this gap by examining what, in contemporary terms, would be called “translational activism” against foreign imperialism, through a case study of Yan Fu (1854-1921), a pioneer activist translator in late Qing China. This study investigates Yan’s activist translation practices by addressing the following research questions:

  1. How did Yan Fu pursue activism against foreign imperialism in his translation?

  2. How did Yan Fu position himself and intervene in the text and paratext as an activist translator?

This article starts with a review of the area of translation and activism. Then, it introduces the data, the conceptual tools of resistance and engagement, and the analytical apparatus of the appraisal framework. The discussion section explores how Yan achieved his activism against foreign imperialism by examining the text and paratext of his translation work, before the article concludes with implications and limitations.

2. Translation and activism

According to Baker (2019: 454), scholars in Translation Studies have been “slow to address the phenomenon of activism” despite “relatively early attempts” by Tymoczko (2000) to reflect on the issue. The subsequent works by Tymoczko (2007; 2010), Baker (2006; 2009; 2013; 2016) and Boéri (2008; 2012) have contributed greatly to the development of this area. According to Tymoczko (2010: 3-4), studies of translation and activism “have their roots in Toury’s articulation of the importance of the receptor cultural system.” Toury (1985: 19) stated that “translations are facts of one system only: the target system.” This realisation has since been expanded to include more political and ideological parameters. In the 1990s, with increasing recognition of interventions by translators throughout history and a growing interest in power and ideology in translation, there were calls for translators to become “active agents of social change,” such as Venuti’s (1995: 307-313) “call to action.” Further to Venuti’s studies, Tymoczko (2007; 2010) proposed going beyond resistance and thinking about translation and activism more broadly, highlighting that resistance is only a reactive view of activism. Instead of simply resisting “social and political constraints,” activists must be able to “initiate action, change direction, construct new goals, articulate new values, [and] seek new paths” (Tymoczko 2010: viii). In general, activism refers to “intentional action whose aim is to bring about social, political, economic, or environmental change” (Brownlie 2010: 45). The concept of translational activism underlines the ways translation has been used to promote “cultural, ideological, and social changes” (Tymoczko 2010: 19).

The area of translation and activism has attracted a range of scholarship adopting different theoretical-conceptual frameworks. The narrative theory from Communication Studies and sociology is one of the main theoretical tools. Baker (2006; 2009) first draws upon the narrative theory to analyse the communities of activist translators and interpreters. Boéri (2008) focuses on the specific activist community Babels and investigates the competing narratives within the group. Pérez-González (2010) examines the dynamic construction of an online narrative community of ad hoc activist translators. Harding (2012) discusses activist online media translations where alternative narratives to the mainstream news are voiced. Bourdieu’s sociological concepts offer another useful theoretical apparatus to investigate activist translation. Inghilleri (2005) elaborates on interpreter agency and interpreting habitus in the political asylum context. Ghessimi (2019) examines an Islamic Marxist translator’s agency by applying Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus, field and capital. Boéri and Delgado Luchner (2020) explore the ethics doxa and heterodoxa of the intersection between translation and activism.

Regarding the context of China, Guo (2008) addresses the activist translators in the Chinese communist movement in the 1920s-30s. Ni (2013) investigates how the American journalist Edgar Snow translated Chinese left-wing literature in the 1930s. Gao (2020) focuses on the translator Lu Xun and discusses his role as an activist in early twentieth-century China. More relevant to the present study are Cheung (2010a; 2010b) and Liu (2020), who explore the translation practice in the late Qing period (1840-1911), including Yan Fu, via the concept of activism. Cheung (2010a; 2010b) draws on Aberle’s (1966) classification of social movements in terms of amount and locus of change. Yan Fu’s translation is classified as “redemptive activism interwoven with reformative strands” (Cheung 2010b: 250). Nevertheless, Cheung (2010a; 2010b) investigates several activist translators and summarises Yan’s translation practices, but without textual analysis. Similarly, Liu (2020) offers an overview of late Qing translation and activism, but Yan’s translation works are not treated in much detail. In the present article, unlike these earlier studies, the focus is on Yan Fu as a representative activist translator as noted by Tymoczko (2010). The present study gives special attention to the linguistic and textual manifestations of Yan’s activist intervention in translation in order to cast new light on the relations of activism and translation in late Qing China.

3. Data and methodology

3.1. Data

This research focuses on Yan Fu’s activism against foreign imperialism in late Qing China. After China’s defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895, foreign imperial aggression further intensified. In this year, Yan’s political activism was most prominent as manifested in a series of political critiques.[1] Accordingly, two works that Yan started translating shortly after this war have been selected as representatives: Tianyan Lun[2] [On Evolution], published in 1898, and Yuan Fu[3] [On Wealth] in 1902. Tianyan Lun, a translation of Thomas Henry Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics[4] (1893) and “Evolution and Ethics Prolegomena”[5] (1894), was profoundly influential in late Qing China, while Yuan Fu is the first Chinese translation of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations[6] (1776). The data examined in this study include both text and paratext, the latter comprising “titles, and subtitles, pseudonyms, forewords, dedications, prefaces, intertitles, epilogues and afterwords” (Genette 1997: xviii). In Yan’s case, the type of paratext—案语 [translator’s commentaries]—is particularly pertinent to this study, as overtly manifesting his activist intervention. The translator’s commentaries added by Yan appear in paragraphs in the middle or at the end of chapters with a clear marker of “commentary” that separates the author’s and translator’s voices.

3.2. Conceptual tools: resistance and engagement

This study adopts Tymoczko’s (2007; 2010) conceptualisation of translational activism as resistance and engagement. The term resistance is associated with Venuti (1992; 1995; 1998). It presumes the existence of a specific opponent and suggests resisting this opponent (Tymoczko 2010: 10). In the present study, resistance is understood as a form of cultural, ideological and social struggle against foreign imperialism. Tymoczko (2007: 210) comments that resistance is only “a reactive view of activism rather than a proactive one.” The other metaphor of activism, engagement, suggests a more proactive stance. It is related to the concept of littérature engagée [engaged or committed literature] that arose in France. Jean-Paul Sartre (1988: 255) promoted this concept widely in the postwar period and advocated using writing “to help effect certain changes in the Society that surrounds us.” The term engagement implies a variety of enterprises initiated by the activists “rather than reactions and oppositions to an external powerful force” (Tymoczko 2010: 11). It should be noted that the term engagement here is different from that used in the appraisal framework in Section 3.3.

The notions of resistance and engagement are treated as two complementary facets of translational activism rather than binaries. Tymoczko (2003: 193) states her opposition to “the binary conceptuali[s]ations of structuralism,” and “take[s] sides with the poststructuralists.” Tymoczko’s delineation of translation as activism rather than resistance challenges the binary distinction. As Tymoczko (2010: viii) points out, “[t]he polari[s]ed nature of resistance, where attention is focused on opposing the force of a defined and more powerful opponent, is an unnecessarily limited view of translational activism.” Activism in translation is a “complex act” that involves “complex textual constructions and complex social positioning” (Tymoczko 2010: 9). The present study uses Tymoczko’s notions of resistance and engagement as descriptive categories for the data analysis.

3.3. Analytical apparatus: appraisal framework

The appraisal framework was developed by Martin and White (2005) and colleagues working within Halliday’s (1994) Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). In Translation Studies, it has been applied to investigate “the linguistic signs of translators’ intervention and subjective stance” (Munday 2012: 2). In other words, appraisal “provides a robust linguistic model, mainly at the micro-level of the text” (Boéri and Fattah 2020: 95) for translation research. In the area of activism, Bock (2007; 2009; 2011) applies the appraisal framework to examine the activism manifested in testimonies. However, Bock (2007: 107-108) admits that she only works on testimonies given in English rather than the translated ones. The present study is not limited to the monolingual text, adopting appraisal to examine Yan Fu’s activist translation.

The appraisal framework comprises three systems: attitude, engagement and graduation. Martin and White (2005: 39) take “attitude as in some sense focal and distinguish engagement and graduation as distinct resources (for adopting a position with respect to propositions and for scaling intensity or degree of investment respectively).” Attitudinal resources are divided into three sub-systems, namely affect, judgement and appreciation: affect involves “registering positive and negative feelings”; judgement is concerned with “attitudes towards behaviour, which we admire or criticise, praise or condemn”; while appreciation deals with “evaluations of semiotic and natural phenomena” (Martin and White 2005: 42-43). The three main types of attitude “express either positive or negative dimensions” in explicit or implicit ways (Bock 2007: 77). Under the category of judgement, judgements dealing with social esteem are related to “normality” (how unusual someone is), “capacity” (how capable they are) and “tenacity” (how resolute they are), while judgements oriented to social sanction have to do with “veracity” (how truthful someone is) and “propriety” (how ethical someone is) (Martin and White 2005: 52). Appreciation is sub-divided into our “reaction” to things (impact), their “composition” (balance and complexity) and valuation (was it worthwhile?) (Martin and White 2005: 56). This study adopts the attitude system as an analytical tool to investigate Yan Fu’s positioning and intervention in his activist translation.

4. Yan Fu’s translational activism against foreign imperialism in late Qing China

In the present study, imperialism is defined as “a certain kind of politics that involves the crossing of borders, disregard for the status quo, interventionism, rapid military deployment at the risk of provoking war, and a determination to dictate the terms of peace” (Osterhammel 2015: 432). This definition is particularly relevant to the historical context of late Qing China under Western and Japanese imperial expansion. Foreign imperialism in the late Qing period began in 1839 with the outbreak of the First Opium War, ignited by China’s ban on the United Kingdom’s export of opium. China’s defeat in this war led to the signing of the Treaty of Nanking in 1842, the first of the series of “unequal treaties”—treaties granting privileges to foreign countries while “conceding China’s sovereign rights” (Ladds 2016: 1). As more Western imperial powers, such as France, launched aggression, late Qing China’s territorial and sovereignty rights were further conceded by these treaties. Foreign imperialism in China intensified in the 1890s when Japan started the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895).

Against this historical backdrop, Yan Fu’s activism against foreign imperialism was prominent. Yan pursued activism in various ways, including writing political critiques, attending political events, making public speeches and starting newspapers. After China’s defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895, Yan wrote penetrating critiques to forcefully voice his opinions on the dangerous situation in China. In 1897, he founded a newspaper, 国闻报 [National News], with other intellectuals to disseminate new ideas and promote reform. With intensified foreign imperialism in late Qing China, Yan also promoted activism through translation. This section explores how he realised translational activism against foreign imperialism and discusses how the two forms of activism—resistance and engagement—are manifested in his translation works.

4.1 Translational activism as resistance

The target of resistance is subject to the specific context. In late Qing China, the most prominent opponent of such resistance was foreign imperialism. Yan Fu’s resistance to imperialism in translation can be further divided into criticism of imperial aggression and opposition to imperial privileges. In his translation work Yuan Fu [On Wealth], Yan not only criticises the imperial aggression of Western powers and Japan but also demonstrates his resistance to imperial privileges, including tariff control and extraterritoriality.

4.1.1 Criticising imperial aggression

As a classic work in economics, the source text of Yuan Fu—Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations (1776)—scarcely deals with the imperial aggression related to late Qing China. However, Smith’s book covers the colonial behaviour of Spain, the UK and the Netherlands, which is described as a part of capital accumulation. In Yuan Fu, Yan Fu airs his criticism of this colonial and imperial invasion by adding paratextual commentaries. The following example of criticism of Spanish colonialists in the West Indies provides more detail. In Chapter 11 “释租” [Explaining the Rent] of Book I, after translating Smith’s discussion on degradation in the value of silver, Yan adds a commentary to disclose how Spain exploited the local people for silver mines in Peru and then criticises Spain’s cruel treatment of West Indians as follows:

In this commentary, Yan construes the Spanish colonialists as cruel and selfish through the expressions “虐” [treated cruelly], “私利” [own interests] and “灭其种而不卹” [exterminate their race without sympathy]. Yan thus uses the negative judgement of social sanction (propriety), thereby positioning the colonialists for moral condemnation. The description of “the population became sparse” implicitly refers to the genocide (Brantlinger 2003). Yan’s utterances of “红种” [the red race] and “灭其种” [exterminate their race] show his concern about race[7] (The Chinese were regarded as the “yellow race”), which is also seen in his appeal for “preserving the race” in Section 4.2.2 below.

Besides overtly voicing his criticism in the paratextual commentaries, Yan uses an addition strategy to show his position. The following is an example of revealing British imperial aggression in Yuan Fu. In Chapter 7 “论外属(亦译殖民地)” [On the Outside (Also on Colonies)] of Book IV, the British policy of planting opium in India is discussed:

Yan’s change of subject is noticeable in Example 2. In the source text, the subject is “the policy of the English company,” whereas in the target text it becomes “印度之民” [the people of India]. The source text describes the “destructive” policy in formal and abstract language to downplay the suffering of the Indian people. By contrast, Yan’s translation discloses their pain more directly.

Moreover, Yan’s activist addition of the last sentence (shown underlined) manifests his textual intervention. In the added sentence, Yan further emphasises the suffering of the Indians. “The people of East Indies” are construed as helpless victims, with a judgement of social esteem (negative capacity). Yan implies criticism of Western imperial aggression by underlining that the local people “罹鞠凶如此” [suffer such a great calamity]. Although Yan adopts the point of view of Adam Smith by using “吾英” [we British], “we British” in the translation is constructed negatively. The exclamation “噫” [alas], indicating grief or sighs,[8] can be viewed as Yan’s negative feelings, namely negative affect. In the commentary that Yan adds immediately after this example, his criticism of imperial aggression is more explicit:

In this commentary, the point of view is different from that in the added sentence in Example 2. Yan takes “the British” here as third person rather than first person and criticises the UK’s imperial aggression in a more overt way. This shift of viewpoint exhibits Yan’s different way of narration from the added sentence. Specifically, the European colonialists are harshly appraised with judgements of social sanction (negative propriety) through the expressions “尽其利” [make full use of their [the colonised’s] interest] and “必残其民” [must harm their people]. They are constructed as selfish, cruel and immoral and positioned for ethical condemnation. Furthermore, Yan expresses his attitude against the British opium policy strongly, as shown in “其无可辞” [they have no excuse]. He also highlights the danger of opium to “泰东” [the Far East], which refers to East, South and Southeast Asia. There are reasons to believe that Yan’s fierce criticism of British opium policy is due to the harm caused by the import of opium into Chinese society. Examples 2 and 3 also demonstrate how the additions made to the text are reinforced by paratextual commentaries, which are abundant in Yan’s translation.

4.1.2. Resisting imperial privileges

Besides the imperial expansion and aggression, Western powers and Japan signed a series of unequal treaties with China to gain imperial privileges, which violated the sovereignty of late Qing China. Yan Fu’s resistance to imperial privileges is discussed in terms of two specific privileges—tariff control and extraterritoriality.

The imperial control of Chinese tariffs resulted in the loss of tariff autonomy in the late Qing period. Tariffs are taxes on imported goods imposed by a government to protect its economic benefits. However, the tariffs in the late Qing period were beneficial for the imperial powers, which were realised by unequal treaties (Guo 2022). The imperial tariff control in late Qing China started from the Treaty of Nanking between the UK and China in 1842, after the First Opium War. According to this treaty, the tariffs on imports and exports in the five treaty ports “should be justly discussed and decided”[9] (Article 10 in the Chinese version). According to the “most favoured nation” clause, China was unable to change any tariffs before asking each country with which it had conventions. In fact, China had no say in the decision and the tariffs were controlled by imperial powers to be unfairly low at the rate of five per cent ad valorem (Jiang 2006). In Yuan Fu [On Wealth], Yan adds commentaries to show his resistance to the imperial tariff control, in Chapter 8 of Book IV, after translating the source text’s discussion on importation and exportation, as can be seen in the following examples:

In Example 4, Yan constructs the right of tariff regulation as legitimate through the expression “专权” [the exclusive right], showing appreciation (positive valuation) of this right. Accordingly, violation of this right is constructed as illegitimate and negative. The conjunction “而” [however] involves an evaluation of counter-expectation: infringement of the right described in the second sentence is represented as unexpected and untoward. The modal verb “必” [must] indicates strong obligation and the obedience required by the conventions, implying a negative judgement of social sanction (propriety) and construing the imperialists as immoral. These conventions refer to a series of unequal treaties, including the Treaty of Nanking in 1842, the Treaty of Wanghia and the Treaty of Whampoa in 1844 as well as the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858. In Example 5, Yan expresses his resistance to the imperial control of tariffs in a more evident way: he further points out that Chinese tariffs were administered by the official from the “敌国” [enemy state], indicating Yan’s negative judgement of the foreign tariff administrator.

Extraterritoriality is another illegal privilege gained by the imperial powers in late Qing China. Extraterritoriality in this article refers to a historical concept rather than the diplomatic immunity in contemporary international laws. For the countries that had extraterritoriality in late Qing China, their citizens were not subject to Chinese laws after committing crimes. Instead, they were tried by their consuls or judicial bodies according to the laws of their own country. China’s extraterritorial rights were thus conceded to foreign powers through unequal treaties in the late Qing period. Yan adds commentaries on the disordered jurisdiction in China, in Chapter 1 of Book V in Yuan Fu, after rendering Smith’s elaboration on the administration of justice. Among the commentaries, Yan demonstrates his opposition to the imperial privilege of extraterritoriality as follows:

In this added commentary, Yan starts with the relationship between the territory and the law. In contrast with the case in Western countries where local laws had to be obeyed, foreign people disobeyed laws in China because of their imperial privilege of extraterritoriality. Yan appraises these imperial powers with judgements of social sanction (negative propriety) by using the expression “悍然不服吾法” [flagrantly disobey our law] and construes the imperialists as rude and immoral.

4.2. Translational activism as engagement

As discussed in Section 3.2, translational activism can be conceptualised as both resistance and engagement. In addition to resistance to foreign imperialism, Yan Fu’s engagement is manifested in reflecting on domestic problems and calling for change. In his memorial to the emperor,[10] Yan points out that the national crisis at that time comprised both foreign danger and domestic problems: “The foreign danger is urgent, yet it is not the root cause of our country’s illness. Therefore, I say, 30 per cent of [our] current weakness is due to foreign danger and 70 per cent is because of our domestic governance” (Yan 1898a/1986: 63).[11] Considering the historical context, “foreign danger” refers to the imperial invasion. Compared with the external imperialism, Yan was more concerned with the internal cause of China’s illness—the problematic “domestic governance.” Yan’s engagement, the more proactive form of activism, focuses on preserving his country by solving the domestic problem and calling for social change. Justifying the need for change first entails revealing the national crisis.

4.2.1 Disclosing the national crisis by adding “social” to Darwinism

As Sartre (1988: 37) suggests, “to reveal is to change.” Revealing the crisis paves the way for effecting the change. In Yan Fu’s case, he discloses the national crisis in late Qing China in his translation work Tianyan Lun [On Evolution] to urge the government to make reforms. According to Pusey (1983: 68, 75), Yan “warn[ed] his countrymen of the Western threat” and “frighten[ed] China into reform.” Exposing the crisis is necessary because the late Qing government and officials failed to recognise the perilous state of their country, despite failures in wars against foreign imperialism. After losing the Sino-Japanese War in 1895, the whole of China was shocked because they were beaten by a “small country” in their view (Dai 1997: 43-44). This reaction of shock indicates the arrogance and complacency of the late Qing government and people. Against such a backdrop, Yan’s aim was to underline the foreign threat and warn that, “if no reform is taken, the country will perish” (Yan 1895e/1986: 40),[12] as articulated in his political critique.[13]

In his translation work Tianyan Lun, Yan discloses the national crisis by adopting social Darwinism, or to put it another way, by adding “social” to Darwinism. The discourse of social Darwinism holds that Darwin’s theory of natural selection can be applied to the evolution of human society (Rogers 1972). Huxley’s source text only involves Darwinism, whereas Yan extends it to human society. In Tianyan Lun, Yan depicts the fierceness of the competition between human races and points out the survival crisis of late Qing China (Pi 2003: 143). The competition between races refers to the conflicts and wars between China and the foreign imperial powers. Yan’s introduction of social Darwinism seems to caution China, saying “Beware, doom looms” (Pusey 1983: 75).

Yan’s adding of “social” to Darwinism can be seen in his discussion on the fierce “物竞” [competition of things] in human society, or in other words, the competition between human races. “Competition of things” corresponds to “struggle for existence” in the source text. This notion became so prevalent after Tianyan Lun was published that even school pupils were asked to write essays on it, as recorded in the memoir of the renown intellectual Hu Shi.[14] At the end of Chapter 4 “人为” [Human Action] of Book I, Yan adds commentaries to apply the concept of “competition of things” to human society and oppose the argument that the indigenous are the fittest, as shown in the following excerpt:

At the beginning of the commentaries, Yan argues that competition is not limited to animals and plants in the natural world. Then, he questions the fitness of the indigenous by noting the population decline of the native people in America and Australia. Although the reason for the decline is not mentioned, this implies historical violence and colonial genocide. As Brantlinger (2003: 2) points out, in places including America and Australia, one of the main causes for the “steep declines in indigenous populations” was “not mysterious: violence, warfare, genocide.” In Yan’s evaluation, this population decline is constructed as a sign of being incapable. The lexical term “负者” [losers] carries the judgement value of social esteem (negative capacity), whereas “最宜” [the fittest] implies the positive judgement of capacity. This value assumption also suggests Yan’s hope of China being “the fittest” rather than “losers” in the “competition of things.” He cautions that the Chinese, the “yellow race,” are in danger, and losing in this competition could result in population decline. Furthermore, the repetitive exclamatory sentences at the end display Yan’s disapproval of China’s complacency, relying as it did on its huge population to avoid such a fate.

Besides warning against losing in the competition between races, Yan further stresses the fierceness of this competition. He uses adjectives including “烈” [fierce], “兴” [rising] and “炎炎” [scorching] to describe the “competition of things” in his translation, which manifests the urgency of the national crisis. The following examples provide more detail:

Example 8 is from Yan’s commentaries at the end of Chapter 3 “趋异” [Divergence] of Book I in Tianyan Lun. Example 9 is Yan’s activist addition in Chapter 15 “最旨” [Summarising Ideas] of Book I. In these examples, Yan depicts “物竞” [competition of things] as “烈” [fierce] and “水深火烈” [[like] deep water and raging fire]. This description involves positive values of appreciation (reaction), suggesting that the impact of the competition is dramatic and intense. In Example 8, Yan not only stresses how fierce the competition is but refers to the Chinese situation in his time with the word “今” [today]. By lamenting that the intellectuals could not perceive the intensity of competition, Yan further discloses the national crisis caused by foreign imperialism. In Example 9, Yan associates the “competition of things” with “战伐纵横” [warfare everywhere], which may imply a reference to the Western and Japanese imperial aggression in late Qing China.

It should be noted that the readers clearly recognised Yan’s activist agenda of warning against the national crisis. For example, Sun Baoxuan, a reformist official in Yan’s time, applauded Yan’s remarks on China’s dangerous situation, by commenting, “this is true: in the world, our yellow race, as well as the black and red races, are in danger” (Sun 1898/1983: 280) in his diary.[15]

4.2.2 Inspiring patriotism by calling for “preserving the race”

In addition to disclosing the national crisis and warning against possible racial extinction, Yan Fu calls for “preserving the race” and inspires patriotism as a solution to the crisis. Tymoczko (2007: 213) refers to a specific kind of engagement when conceptualising translation as a form of activism: “translations that rouse, inspire, witness, mobili[s]e, and incite to rebellion.” Similarly, in Yan’s case, his translation work Tianyan Lun [On Evolution] played the role of rousing, inspiring, mobilising and inciting patriotism in late Qing China. During times of national crisis, patriotism helps weather the storm. As the crisis in late Qing China was triggered by foreign imperialism, the sense of patriotism or the willingness to defend the country was critical. More specifically, patriotism at the time was associated with the concept of “保种” [preserving the race], with “种” [race] referring to China—the “yellow race.” In late Qing China, the idea of patriotism or “loving the country” always appeared at the same time as “preserving the race” (Wu 2014: 52).

Yan inspires patriotism by appealing for “preserving the race” in his translation work Tianyan Lun. In his translator’s preface, Yan argues that the source text “repeatedly stresses self-strengthening and preserving the race” (Yan 1898b/1986: 1321).[16] This concept of “preserving the race,” however, has no basis in Huxley’s texts. Yan airs his own view in the name of Huxley through the translator’s preface. In a similar way, he advocates another concept “保群” [preserving the group] which is almost synonymous with “preserving the race,” in the paratextual commentaries. The term “群” [group] also refers to China and Yan uses this term to translate “society” in Huxley’s work. Similar to the claim that the source text stresses “preserving the race” in the preface, Yan associates the concept of “preserving the group” with Huxley in the commentaries:

Through the commentaries, Yan further advocates “preserving the group” in the name of Huxley to rouse and inspire patriotism. The so-called “Huxley’s argument on preserving the race” is appraised as “辨” [insightful], indicating positive appreciation (valuation). Besides the paratextual preface and commentaries, Yan also directly adds “preserving the group” in the text, as shown in the following example from Chapter 16 “群治” [Group Governance] of Book II:

In Example 12, Yan’s activist addition of “preserving the group” is prominent, among his additions marked with an underline. In the source text, the lexical terms “the strongest” and “the most self-assertive” deliver positive judgement value (capacity and tenacity), whereas the expressions “those less fitted to adapt themselves to the circumstances” and “the weaker” express negative evaluation. In his translation, Yan instils the value of “preserving the group” through the substitution strategy. In the sentence added by Yan at the end, “善保群者” [those good at preserving the society] is associated with “存” [survival] and positively appraised, while “不善保群者” [those not good at preserving the society] is linked to “灭” [extinction] and indicates negative judgement. This explicit addition of value shows Yan’s advocacy for “preserving the group.”

These examples are no exception: in Yan’s translation work Tianyan Lun, five out of the six occurrences of “preserving the group” are added by him in text and through paratextual commentaries, with only one occurrence having a corresponding expression in the original—“watchman of the society.” The concept of “preserving the race” (seven occurrences) is added by Yan through the preface and commentaries. After Tianyan Lun was published, Yan’s appeal for preserving their race and country profoundly influenced scholar-officials and students, as well as the general public (Pi 2003: 161).

4.2.3 Calling for action by advocating “triumphing over nature”

Action is a core element of conceptualising translational activism as engagement. Engagement is the form of activism “involving choice and action,” in contrast to the metaphor of activism as resistance which implies reaction more than action (Tymoczko 2010: 10-11). A translation is activist so long as it “stirs readers and audiences to action” (Gould and Tahmasebian 2020: 4). In the case of Yan Fu, action is also a key concept in his translation work Tianyan Lun [On Evolution]. As Schwartz (1964: 45) points out, Darwin’s theories not only “describe reality” but “prescribe values and a course of action.” In fact, the discourse of social Darwinism was criticised by Huxley yet supported by Spencer. Yan’s choice of translating Huxley’s “anti-Social-Darwinism” book to introduce social Darwinism could be attributed to Huxley’s call for human action (Pusey 1983: 169). In other words, Yan “wanted action, and Huxley gave a call for action much more clearly than did Spencer” (Pusey 1983: 169). Yan (1898b/1986: 1321) states clearly in his preface that Huxley’s book aims to correct Spencer’s fallacy of “任天为治” [letting nature rule]. Wu Rulun, Yan’s mentor, also indicates that Huxley’s idea of “以人持天” [man controlling nature] can make the readers realise the need to make changes, in his preface to Tianyan Lun (Yan 1898b/1986: 1318).

Yan’s call for action was aimed at changing the attitudes of those in power who could launch political reform. After the First Opium War, although some officials realised the need to make changes, exemplified by Li Hongzhang (1823-1901) who initiated the “自强运动” [self-strengthening movement], changes were still limited to technology instead of politics. Most scholar-officials opposed political changes or “变法” [changing the ways], as can be seen in the prevalent belief that the ancestors’ ways cannot change (Jiang 2006: 62). This conservativeness could be attributed to the traditional Confucian belief that rather than humans, natural law decides political changes (Cheng 2011: 89-90).

In Tianyan Lun, Yan rectifies this belief by advocating for Huxley’s argument of “combating the cosmic process,” translating this as “与天争胜” [triumphing over nature]. Among the complex connotations of “天” as sky, heaven and the Confucianist supreme, the meaning of “nature” is the most relevant in Yan’s translation. He demonstrates his support of “triumphing over nature” in Chapter 17 “进化” [Evolution] of Book II, the last chapter of Tianyan Lun, as follows:

In Example 13, Huxley argues that “the ethical progress of society” depends on combating “the cosmic process.” In Yan’s translation, however, “治道之有功” [success in governance] requires “triumphing over nature.” The term “governance” suggests that the subject of triumph over nature is man, similar to the understanding of “man controlling nature” articulated by Yan’s mentor Wu Rulun. Yan positively appraises “triumphing over nature” by associating it with “success,” similar to Huxley’s positive appreciation (valuation) through “progress.” Shortly after this example, Yan further demonstrates his advocacy for “triumphing over nature” using the addition strategy:

In Example 14, Yan attributes the wealth and strength of Europe to its triumph over nature and control of everything, appraising “triumph over nature” as positive. By advocating human “triumphing over nature,” Yan aims to rectify the conservative belief that natural laws decide political changes. Instead, by calling for human power and agency, Yan urges officials to act immediately and make political reforms. In Chapter 17 “乌托邦” [Utopia] of Book I, Yan justifies “triumphing over nature” from another angle as follows:

In Example 15, the idea of “任天行之自然” [letting nature take its course] corresponds to “the free play of the struggle for existence” in the source text. Yan maintains the positive evaluation of the “ideal polity” in the original by translating it as “乌托邦” [utopia]. By setting “utopia” against “letting nature take its course,” Yan expresses his negative appreciation of following natural law. This evaluation is also in line with Yan’s objection to Spencer’s “letting nature rule,” in his preface to Tianyan Lun. By opposing “letting nature take its course,” Yan advocates triumphing over nature, and calls for action.

5. Conclusion

This study has investigated how Yan Fu pursued activism against foreign imperialism in his translation practice. Tymoczko’s (2007; 2010) notions of resistance and engagement are used as descriptive categories for the empirical analysis. It is found that Yan demonstrates his resistance to foreign imperialism by criticising foreign aggression and resisting imperial privileges, while Yan manifests his engagement by disclosing the national crisis, inspiring patriotism and calling for action. Considering the complex nature of activism in translation (Tymoczko 2010), the two concepts of resistance and engagement are treated not as binaries but as two entangled facets of translational activism.

The present research addressed translational activism in the Chinese context which has received scant scholarly attention. Following Cheung’s (2010a; 2010b) discussion of the activist-translators in late Qing China, this study has focused on Yan Fu and demonstrates how he positioned himself and intervened in the text and paratext. Moreover, studies on translation and activism have “so far focused less on textual intervention and more on the broader role of the translator as a social and political actor” (Boéri 2020: 3). The present study has filled this gap by examining the linguistic and textual manifestations of Yan’s activist intervention. Following Bock’s (2007; 2009; 2011) application of appraisal to investigate activism, this study makes a theoretical contribution by adopting the appraisal framework in the area of translation and activism.

This article restricts itself to Yan’s activism against foreign imperialism rather than offering an overview of his translational activism at different stages. It is intended that future studies will explore Yan’s overall activist translation practice and discuss the relationship between activism and his well-known translation principles of xin-da-ya which refer to faithfulness, adequacy of conveyance, elegance.