What is the difference between Li Hongzhang's and Mori Yuri's views on dress reform?

The nineteen seventies to nineties, the ruling groups of China and Japan have carried out the "rich and powerful" as the goal of the modernization reform movement, that is, China's foreign affairs movement and Japan's Meiji Restoration, but the effectiveness of the two movements are very different, the Sino-Japanese War has seen the difference. The reasons for this are complex, among which the different concepts and mentality of the rulers of the two countries towards reform and opening up and East-West culture is also a noteworthy issue. This paper attempts to make a specific and typical analysis of this through the Qing government, the leader of the foreign affairs faction, the Governor-General of Zhili and Minister of the North China Sea Li Hongzhang and Japan's Meiji era * family Mori Yurie, a verbal debate.

January 24, 1876, as Japan's minister to China, Mori Youli went to Baoding, the governor's residence, visited Li Hongzhang. The two are said to have talked for several hours, mainly on diplomatic topics such as the situation in Korea. But the conversation sometimes touched on issues such as reform and opening up and East-West culture, and there was a tit-for-tat debate between the two sides.

According to the Chinese historical material "Li Hongzhang and Sen Youli Q&A abridged", shortly after the two met, Li Hongzhang asked Sen Youli's view of the eastern and western cultures. Sen Youli replied: "Western countries learned very useful, Chinese learning only three points desirable, the remaining seven points is still the old, has been useless." As Japan's "civilization and enlightenment" advocate Mori Youli, that Western culture on the development of Japan's modern "very useful", to learn, while Confucianism as the center of traditional Chinese culture on Japan only "three points Can be taken", most of them have been obsolete and useless, these two words reflect the Japanese ruling group at the time of the value of the cultural judgment of the East and West. H.E. Ambassador Li then asked Mori Yueli the extent of Japan's study of Western culture: "Japan's Western learning has seven points or not?" Mori Youli answered: "five points is not yet." Li Hongzhang felt very surprised, then asked: "Japan's clothes have changed, how to say no five points?" At this time the Japanese Embassy's clerk Zheng Yongning explained: "This is the appearance, in fact, the skills have not yet learned." Mori Youli and further explained: "my country up and down all good, only learned ready-made art, not like the West from their own hearts to come up with the law of a person." ("Abridged Questions and Answers between Li Hongzhang and Mori Youli," The Sino-Japanese War (Chinese Modern History Materials Series) (I) 299.) He believed that the mere introduction and imitation of Western culture and science and technology can only be counted as half of the learning, but must also be based on their own innovation and development.

The two men also talked about their views on the series of reforms carried out by the Meiji Restoration in Japan by learning from the West, and in particular there was a heated debate around the issue of clothing reform. The debate is documented in detail in the book Mr. Mori's Biography, written by the Japanese scholar Kuang Kimura in the Meiji era.

Li Hongzhang began with a challenge: "For the recent move of your country is very much appreciated, but only to your country to change the old clothing, imitating the European style is puzzled." Sen Youli replied: "The reason is very simple, just a little explanation, our old system of clothing, as you can see, wide and fast, very suitable for people who have nothing to do, but for more hard-working people, it is not entirely appropriate, so it can adapt to the past situation, but in today's situation, very inconvenient. Now change the old system for the new style, for our country benefit a lot." Li Hongzhang, however, that this is contrary to the will of the ancestors, he accused: "clothes old system, reflecting one of the ancestral legacy of the memorial, its children and grandchildren should be treasured, preserved for all generations is." Mori Yuri immediately countered, "If our ancestors were still alive today, they would undoubtedly be doing the same thing we are doing. A thousand years ago, our ancestors saw the advantages of your country's clothing and adopted it. No matter what, it is our tradition to learn from the strengths of other countries." Li Hongzhang added: "Your Excellency to your country to give up the old clothes to imitate European customs, abandon the spirit of independence and subject to European domination, do not feel ashamed at all?" Sen Yueli categorically replied: "There is no shame, we are also proud of these changes. These changes were in no way forced by external forces but were entirely decided by our country itself. As we have done since ancient times with Asia, the United States and other countries, whenever we find their strengths, we take them and use them for our country."

Li Hongzhang insisted on the Chinese foreign affairs school "secondary school for the body, Western learning for use" of the basic position, claiming that: "our country will never carry out such reforms, only the military, railroads, telecommunications and other equipment is a necessity and the West's longest, only had to be adopted by foreign countries. " Mori Yurei countered by pointing out that the clothing system of the Qing Dynasty was also not traditional Chinese clothing, but was forced on the Han Chinese after the Qing army entered the country in 1644. He said: "All is the future, who can not determine its good or bad, just as your country four hundred years ago (refers to the Qing army people before the Customs), and no one likes this kind of clothing system now." Li Hongzhang had to argue strongly: "This is our domestic changes, never with European customs." Mori Yurei, on the other hand, emphasized, "However, change is always change, especially at that time when your country forced this change, which aroused the jealousy of your people." (Kuang Kimura, "Biography of Mr. Mori," pp. 99-102, Kinko-do, third edition, Meiji 42 (1909).)

This debate between Li Hongzhang and Mori Yurei, which seems to be mainly centered on the question of whether to reform the clothing or not, in fact demonstrated the major differences in conceptual understanding and mentality between the rulers of China and Japan at that time in their treatment of social reform and the culture of the East and the West.

Li Hongzhang, as the head of the foreign affairs bureaucracy of the Qing government, although he also advocated learning from the West, much more enlightened than the most conservative bureaucrats and aristocrats, but his basic guiding ideology of reform is "middle school for the body, western learning for the use". As he argued in the above dialogue, "only warships, railroads, telecommunications and other equipment is necessary and the longest place in the West, had to be adopted in foreign countries. Therefore, Li Hung-chang strongly advocated the introduction of Western military and industrial technology, advocating the opening of factories, railroads, naval construction and other foreign affairs activities, and appreciated the achievements of the Meiji Restoration in Japan in this regard. However, he insisted on "secondary school for the body", that is, the feudal * system and Confucianism's ethical concepts as well as law, calendar, dress etiquette and other "ancestral law", should not be changed. Therefore, for the reform of this aspect of the attitude of rejection, resistance, and even regarded as a very shameful thing. Li Hongzhang not only severely criticized Japan's Meiji Restoration from this point of view, and categorically said: "Our country will never carry out such a change," this attitude in addition to explaining the foreign affairs faction attempts to safeguard the feudal rule of the Qing Dynasty and the vested interests of the group, but also reflects the Chinese Confucianism in the reverence for the past, reverence for the ancestor, the importance of righteousness and light profit, talk about righteousness and not practical results! The traditional concepts of Chinese Confucianism, as well as the Chinese cultural superiority and arrogance, "Chinese and barbarians thought", the resistance to reform and the rejection of foreign cultures.

Japan's Meiji era *family* had a much deeper understanding of reform and opening up and learning from Western culture. In the Meiji Restoration, they were able to learn from the West and implement reforms in general and in all aspects, from material technology to institutions, concepts and customs. They were not only proud of the fact that they had no shame in abandoning the traditional culture that did not fit the situation and absorbing the strengths of foreign cultures, but they were also proud of the fact that they had done so. In the Meiji era, there was also the "Kagamikan phenomenon" of blindly pursuing westernized buildings and dance parties in a wholesale imitation of the West. However, Japan's insightful * home, not satisfied with the simple introduction and superficial imitation, such as Mori Yuri said, trying to combine the characteristics of Japan's own, "in their own minds to come up with a method", to innovate and develop. In the reform of clothing and calendar, they also started from the values of adapting to the needs of the development of the situation and pragmatism, and "gave up the old for the new", and reformed as long as it was beneficial to the economic development and modernization.

Promoting the depth of the reform, must first change the concept of thinking. More than a hundred years ago, Li Hongzhang and Sen Youli this debate, is not very worthwhile for us to recall and think y about it?