《中国人的性格》是美国传教士阿瑟·史密斯（明恩溥）基于1872年赴华传教期间的社会观察撰写的著作，首版英文名《Chinese Characteristics》于19世纪末问世，。作者在华生活逾五十年，书中融合人类学视角与传教士立场，记录了晚清民众的性格特征与文化形态。
全书以27个主题章节剖析中国人行为模式，包含“保全面子”“省吃俭用”等生活哲学，以及“漠视精确”“因循守旧”等社会现象。通过对比西方工业文明，着重探讨东方特有的生存韧性，如环境适应力与疼痛耐受性。书中案例多源自山东乡村生活经历，涉及衣食住行、孝悌观念等主题，部分结论因宗教立场存在视角争议。该著作开创西方研究中国国民性先河，被译成多国文字，成为近代中西文化互鉴的重要文本。
原书序：我所见之中国人
在法庭上，人们总是要求见证人所说的都是真话，没有半点含糊，只是真话。许多略知中国人的见证人，虽然能说出一些真实的东西，但他们当中，大概并没有多少人能如实地叙述，更不用说让他们讲出全面的真情。任何个人，无论他的知识面多宽，都不可能真正了解中国人的全部真实情况。因而，本书必须面对来自三种不同观点的异议。
首先，或许有人会说，要把所知道的有关中国人的特性如实地转述给他人，那只是白费力气。乔治·温格罗夫·库克先生，是1857至1858年期间伦敦《泰晤士报》的一位专门采访中国的记者；他像所有到中国去的作家一样，有机会亲眼目睹在各种环境下的中国人，并可以借助于那些很具资历的人物的看法去了解中国人。然而，库克先生在他所出版的书信集的前言中却承认他对中国人特性的描述是失败的，并为此表示歉意。他说：“在这些书信里，有关中国人特性的作品，我写得并不够精彩，这是很大的疏忽。这本是一个最具诱惑力且最能施展才华的题目：机智的假定，深刻的概括，自信的断言，都可以在其中得到展示。那些吹毛求疵的批评家们肯定会由于我没有从这种机会中有所收获而鄙视我。事实上，关于中华民族，我曾写过中国人不少优秀的品质，但不幸的是，在我把眼前的那些具体的人物置于笔下时，他们曾有过的粗俗的言行却与我的初衷相违背。为了追求真实，我连续烧掉了好几封长信。此外，我还经常就这些事，与最著名的汉学家坦诚地进行交流。结果发现，他们与我一样，都认为要形成有关中国人特性的整体概念是不可能的。当然，这些困难只有那些真正了解中国人的汉学家们才会遇到。一位足够精明的作家，可以在完全撇开主题的情况下，轻易地作出两个客观真实、冠冕堂皇但相互对立的分析。有朝一日，我们或许可以获取某些必要知识，能够全面准确地分析和评价中国佬的特性中明显的自相矛盾。目前，我至少必须排除严格的界定，用中国人所具有的特殊品性去描述中国佬。”
在过去的三十年中，中国人已经使自己成为国际事务中的一个重要角色。他们被看做是压服不了的、神秘的民族。的确，除了在中国，任何其他国家的人都不可能真正了解中国人。在很多人的印象中，中国人似乎是一个根本无法理解的矛盾体。但是，既然我们已经与中国打了几百年的交道，那么，我们就没有理由不对中国大地上的人民以及其他复杂的现象作同等看待。
“其次，对本书更为严重的反对意见是笔者并不完全具备写此书的资格。一个在中国生活了二十二年的人，并不能完全保证他有能力写出有关中国人特性的书，正如一个在银矿里埋头苦干了二十二年的人，并不足以证明他有资格撰写出有关冶金学或复本位制的论文。中国是一个巨大的整体；一个还未考察过它的一半以上省份且只是在其中两个省居住过的人，当然没有资格对这整个国家作出概括。本书的这些文章最初只是为上海的《北华捷报》（《字林西报》）所准备的，并没有考虑更广泛的传播。然而，其中的一些论题不仅在中国，而且在英国、美国和加拿大都引起了极大的兴趣，笔者这才应读者的要求将文章汇编成册。”
还有一些人提出了第三种反对意见，即本书所阐发的某些看法，特别是涉及中国人道德特征的观点，对中国人产生了误解和不公正，可能误导人们的看法。
然而，大家必须要记住，印象随笔并不可能像统计数字那样丝毫不差。它们更像是照片的底片，它冲出的照片，没有哪两张是完全相同的。但每一张底片，都真实地再现其他底片所没有表现出的某些方面。拍照用的胶片不同，镜头不同，显影剂又不同，其结果，当然也就各有差异。
许多久居中国的人，对这个国家的了解完全要比笔者多得多。然而，他们所表达的观点，与笔者是完全一致的。在另外一些人看来，在某些部位润色一下、加一些亮丽的色彩，会给这幅过于单调的画面增添真实性。这些人的看法，同样值得尊重。正是考虑到这些十分正确的意见，笔者对原文作了全面的修订。由于出版的时间十分仓促，原来所讨论的中国人特性的文字有三分之一被删减了。当然，最重要的部分仍然保留，并新增写了“知足常乐”一章。
中国人具备并且表现出来的一切美好德操，我们理所当然要大加由衷的赞美。同时，我们又不能陷于某种先定的思维束缚，过于抬高他们实际上所不具有的道德品行——这种行为的危害性，并不亚于那种不分青红皂白的指责。这使我们联想起了小说家萨克雷。曾经有人询问他，在他的小说作品中，怎么会有好人总是笨蛋，坏人却是机智过人。对此，这位伟大的讽刺作家回答说，他是无心的，并没有做出深入的思考。有一幅表现橡树姿态的木刻画，要求观察者从橡树的轮廓中分辨出拿破仑来。他正抱着臂，低下头，站在圣赫勒拿岛。起先，长时间地盯着画面看，往往一无所获。如此这般，欣赏者未免要指责作者牵强附会。可是，一旦经由他人稍稍指点，看画者在看画时就不可避免地能看到拿破仑的样子。同样的道理，在中国，许多事起初常常会看到，但却并没有被深深地注意到，而一旦被指出来引起注意，就会令人难以忘却。
正如限制性的从句不能取代概括性的主句，本书中的文章，并不是立意于对整个中华帝国的概括，也不是诸多外国人所见所闻的大杂烩。这点，必须提请读者们注意。这些文章，仅仅是一位观察者本人对自己的印象所作的描述，只是许多“中国人性格”中的一部分。它们并不构成一幅中国民众的肖像图，而更像是观察者根据自己的所见所闻，用炭笔对中国民众的某些特性所作的简略素描。它们仅仅只能组成一条光线，而无数条这样的光线交织在一些，才能形成一道白光光柱。它们也可能被视作归纳研究，这里所涉及的诸多细节不仅仅是笔者的体验，也是其他各种人在许多场合下的亲历。只不过，在这里，它们得到汇集。正是为了做到这一点，围绕着各个主题，我列举了大量的具体事例。
密迪乐先生是众多研究中国及中国人的作家中最富哲理性的一位。他曾经表达过这样一种观点：一个人对外国民族的性格有了许多正确的看法，并希望把这种看法转达给他人时，其最佳方式莫过于把所有相关的笔记都交给他细读。在这些笔记中，要详尽记录着大量引人注目的事件，特别是那些对外国人来说非同寻常的事件，并附有该国人士对该事件的说明。
正是通过大量的此类事件，才能推出一个一般性结论。推出的结论可以遭到质疑或者完全被否定，但所列举的那些个别事例，只要是真实的，就不能仅仅由于某种原因而被丢在一边。未来任何有关中国人性格的理论，最终都必须仰仗这些事例作出分析。
将中国人与盎格鲁—撒克逊人进行比较，是十分困难的。试图从事这一研究的人，最能强烈地感受到这一点。显然，许多被视为属于中国人“性格”的东西，实际上只是东方人的特性。通过阅读本书，你将会看到这一点。至于到底准确与否，每位读者都可以根据自己的切身经验加以判断。
据说，在与中国人打交道的现如今，有三条途径可以去了解他们的社会生活：研究他们的小说、研究他们的民谣和研读他们的戏剧。这些研究途径无疑有其自身价值的，但似乎这其中还会有第四条途径。这一途径比前三者相加起来还有价值，但是这一途径并不能向所有研究中国和中国人的作家开放。那就是研究那些居住在自己家乡的中国人，深入其家庭生活中去。正如身在农村比在城市里更能明白一个区域的地形风貌，在农村里，也更易掌握一种人的特性。一个外国人在中国的城市里住上十年，他所能获取的有关中国人家庭生活的知识，或许并不如他在中国农村住上十二个月所获得的知识多。
除了研究中国人的家庭，我们还必须把村庄看做是构成中国社会生活的基本单元。因此，本书的这些文章，正是以中国农村为立足点而写成的。这些文章的目的，并不是为了表达一个基督教传教士的观点，它们是一个没有任何主观偏见的观察者对自己所见所闻的如实报告。正是由于这个缘故，本书没有太多涉及所谓用基督教改善中国人性格的问题，也不贸然作出中国人需要基督教的假定。但是，假如他们的性格中的确表现出了诸多严重的缺陷，那么，在此基础上，这些缺陷如何去纠正，才是一个很值得研究的问题。
人们所谈论的“中国问题”，如今已远不是一个国家的问题，而是国际性的问题。完全有理由相信，在二十世纪，这一问题将是更为紧迫的问题。中国人是人类中相当大的一个组成部分。如何去改善他们，都将是每一个希望人类美好的人不能不感兴趣的一个专题。如果我们坚信自己的这些结论是正确的话，那么，即使以往它们都被忽略，这些结论依然将会得到一系列论据的支持；如果这些结论错了，无论获得怎样支持，都不攻自破。
多年以前，额尔金勋爵士与上海的商界有过一次问答。时至今日，他的话依然是非常正确的和中允的。他说：“当那些阻止人们自由进入这个国家的障碍被搬开时，西方基督教文明将发现自己所面对的不是一片荒漠，而是一个古老的文明。它在许多方面都表现出巨大的衰退与残缺，但在另一些方面，又不能不令我们抱以同情和尊敬。在行将到来的竞争中，基督教文明要想走上战胜这个猜疑重重且又足智多谋的民族的道路，必须要使人们明白，抵达天堂的信仰比不离尘世的生活原则，更能保证公众和个人具有良好的道德品行。”
英文原版：
AWITNESS when put upon the stand is expected to tellthe truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.Many witnesses concerning the Chinese have told the truth,but perhaps few of them have succeeded in telling nothingbut the truth, and no one of them has ever told the wholeNo single individual, whatever the extent of his knowledge, could by any possibility know the whole truth aboutthe Chinese. The present volume of essays is therefore opento objection from three different points of view.
First, it may be said that the attempt to convey to othersan idea of the real characteristics of the Chinese is vain.Mr. George Wingrove Cooke, the China correspondent of theLondon Times in 1857-58, enjoyed as good an opportunityof seeing the Chinese under varied circumstances, and throughthe eyes of those well qualified to help him to a just understanding of the people, as any writer on China up to thattime. In the preface to his published letters, Mr. Cooke apologises as follows for his failure to describe the Chinesecharacter: "I have, in these letters, introduced no elaborateessay upon Chinese character. It is a great omission. Notheme could be more tempting, no subject could afford wider scope for ingenious hypothesis, profound generalisation, andtriumphant dogmatism. Every small critic will probablyutterly despise me for not having made something out ofsuch opportunities. The truth is, that I have written severalvery fine characters for the whole Chinese race, but havingthe misfortune to have the people under my eye at the sametime with my essay, they were always saying something ordoing something which rubbed so rudely against my hypothesis, that in the interest of truth I burnt several successive letters.I may add that I have often talked over this matterwith the most eminent and candid sinologues, and havealways found them ready to agree with me as to the im^ssibility of a conception of Chinese character as a whole.These difficulties, however, occur only to those who know theChinese practically ; a smart writer, entirely ignorant of thesubject, might readily strike off a brilliant and antitheticalanalysis, which should leave nothing to be desired but truth.Some day, perhaps, we may acquire the necessary knowledgeto give to each of the glaring .inconsistencies of a Chinaman'smind its proper weight and influence in the general mass. Atpresent, I, at least, must be content to avoid strict definitions,and to describe a Chinaman* by his most prominent qualities."
Within the past thirty years, the Chinese has made himselfa factor in the affairs of many lands. He is seen to be irrepressible ;11is felt to be incomprehensible.He cannot, indeed,be rightly understood in any country but China, yet the impression still prevails that he is a bundle of contradictions whocannot be understood at all. But after all there is no apparent reason, now that several hundred years of our ac- ' /vquaintance with China have elapsed, why what is actually iknown of its people should not be co-ordinated, as well as'any other combination of complex phenomena.
A more serious objection to this particular volume is thatthe author has no adequate qualifications for writing, it. Thecircumstance that a person has lived for twenty-two years inChina is no more a guarantee that he is competent to writeof the characteristics of the Chinese, than the fact that anotherman has for twenty-two years been biuied in a silver mine isa proof that he is a fit person to compose a treatise on metallurgy, or on bi-metallism. China is a vast whole, and onewho has never even visited more than half its provinces, andwho has lived in but two of them, is certainly not entitled togeneralise for the whole Empire. These papers were originally prepared for the North-China Daily News of Shanghai,with no reference to any wider circulation. Some of thetopics treated excited, however, so much interest, not only inChina, but also in Great Britain, in the United States, and inCanada, that the author was asked to reproduce the articlesin a permanent form.
A third objection, which will be offered by some, is thatparts of the views here presented, especially those which dealwith the moral ch^acter of the Chinese, are misleading andunjust.
It should be remembered, however, that impressions arenot like statistics which may be corrected to a fraction. They rather resemble photographic negatives, no two of which maybe ahke, yet each of them may present truthfully somethingnot observable in any of the rest. The plates on which thephotographs are taken differ ; so do the lenses, and the developers, and the resulting views differ too.
Many old residents of China, whose knowledge of thecountry is very much greater than that of the writer, have expressed themselves as in substantial agreement with his opinions, while others, whose judgment is entitled to equal respect,think that a somewhat lighter coloiuing in certain parts wouldincrease the fidelity of the too "monochromatic" picture.With this undoubtedly just criticism in mind, the work hasbeen revised and amended throughout. While the exigenciesof republication at this time have rendered convenient theomission of one-third of the characteristics originally discussed, those that remain contain nevertheless the most important portions of the whole, and the chapter on Content andCheerfulness is altogether new.
There can be no vahd excuse for withholding commendationfrom the Chinese for any one of the many good qualities whichthey possess and exhibit. At the same time, there is a dangerof yielding to h j>riori considerations, and giving the Chinesecredit for a higher practical morality than they can justly claim—an evil not less serious than indiscriminate condemnation.It is related of Thackeray, that he was once asked how it happened that the good people in his novels were always stupid,and the bad people clever. To this the great satirist repliedthat he had no brains above his eyes. There is a wood-cutrepresenting an oak tree, in the outlines of which the observeris invited to detect a profile of Napoleon on the island ofSt. Helena, standing with bowed head and folded arms. Protracted contemplation frequently fails to discover any suchprofile, and it would seem that there must be some mistake,but when once it is clearly pointed out, it is impossible to look at the picture and not see the Napoleon too. In like manner,many things are to be seen in China which do not at firstappear, and many of them once seen are never forgotten.
While it has been impossible to introduce a quaUf)dng clauseinto every sentence which is general in its form, the reader isexpressly warned that these papers are not intended to begeneralisations for a whole Empire, nor yet comprehensiveabstracts of what foreigners have observed and experienced.What they are intended to be is merely a notation of the impression which has been made upon one observer, by a fewout of many " Chinese Characteristics." They are not meantas a portrait of the Chinese people, but rather as mere outlinesketches in charcoal of some features of the Chinese people, asthey have been seen by that one observer. Taken together,they constitute only a single ray, of which an indefinite numberare required to form a complete beam of white light. They may also be considered as studies in induction, in which manyparticulars taken from the experience not of the writer only,but of various other individuals at various times, are grouped.It is for this reason that the subject has been so largely treatedby exemplification.
Mr. Meadows, the most philosophical of the many writerson China and the Chinese, expressed the opinion that thebest way to convey to the mind of another person a correctidea of the genius of a foreign people would be to hand him for perusal a collection of notes, formed by carefully recordinggreat numbers of incidents which had attracted one's attention,particularly those that seemed at all extraordinary, togetherwith the explanation of the extraordinary parts as given by^natives of the country.
From a sufficient number of such incidents a general principle is inferred. The inferences may be doubted or denied,but such particulars as are cited cannot, for that reason alone,be set aside, being so far as they go truthful, and they must ultimately be reckoned with in any theory of the Chinese character.
The difficulty of comparing Chinese with Anglo-Saxons willbe most strongly felt by those who have attempted it. Tosuch it will soon become evident that many things whichseem "characteristic " of the Chinese are merely Oriental traits ;but to what extent this is true, each reader in the lightof his own experience must judge for himself.
It has been said that in the present stage of our intercoursewith Chinese there are three ways in which we can come tosome knowledge of their social life—by the study of theirnovels, their ballads, and their plays. Each of these sources of information doubtless has its worth, but there is likewisea fourth, more valuable than all of them combined, a source/ not open to every one who writes on China and the Chinese.
It is the study of the family life of the Chinese in their own\\ homes. As the topography of a district can be much better /understood in the country than in the city, so it is with thecharacteristics of the people. A foreigner may live in a Chinese city for a decade, and not gain as much knowledge of the interior life of the people as he can acquire by living twelvemonths in a Chinese village. Next to the Family we mustregard the Village as the unit of Chinese social life, and it istherefore from the standpoint of a Chinese village that thesepapers have been written. They are of purpose not intendedto represent the point of view of a missionary, but that of anobserver not consciously prejudiced, who simply reports whathe sees. For this reason no reference is made to any characteristics of the Chinese as they may be modified by Christianity.It is not assumed that the Chinese need Christianity atall, but if it appears that there are grave defects in their char'vacter, it is a fair question how those defects may be remedied.
The " Chinese question," as already remarked, is now farmore than a national one. It is international. There is reason to think that in the twentieth century it will be an evenmore pressing question than at present. The problem of the'means by which so vast a part of the human race may be improved cannot be without interest to any one who wisheswell to mankind. If the conclusions to which we may findourselves led are correct, they will be supported by a line ofargument heretofore too much neglected. If these conclusionsare wrong, they will, however supported, fall of themselves.
It is many years since Lord Elgin's reply to an addressfrom the merchants of Shanghai, but his words are true andpertinent to-day. " When the barriers which prevent freeaccess to the interior of the country shall have been removed.Christian civihsation of the West will find itself face to facenot with barbarism, but with an ancient civilisation in manyrespects effete and imperfect, but in others not without claimsto our sympathy and respect. In the rivalry which will thenensue. Christian civihsation will have to win its way among asceptical and ingenious people, by making it manifest that afaith which reaches to heaven furnishes better guarantees forpubhc and private morality than one which does not riseabove the earth.
热门跟贴