On Some Encounters with the Soviet Humans：Revolutionary Travel Writing，Modern Chinese Writers，and World Literature*#

WANG Pu

Abstract：For André Gide，travel writing becomes a textual and cultural-politi‐cal engagement in encounters with the truly New Humans of a foreign land.As part of a comprehensive study of revolutionary travel literature in twentieth-century Chi‐nese culture，this essay explores such encounters with the Soviet Humans in a series of travel writings by revolutionary Chinese writers and intellectuals，thereby advanc‐ing an argument that attempts to situate these encounters in a global genealogy of USSRtravelogues in the first half of the twentieth century.

Keywords：The Soviet Humans；revolutionary travel writing；modern Chinese literature；world literature

Travel Writing as the Search for the Soviet Humans

Ah！Que n’étais-je venu simplement en touriste！ou en naturaliste ravi de découvrir làbas quantité de plantes nouvelles，de reconnaître sur les hauts plateaux la《scabieuse du Caucase》de mon jardin...Mais ce n’est point là ce que je suis venu chercher en U.R.S.S.Ce qui m’y importe c’est l’homme，les hommes，et ce qu’on en peut faire，et ce qu’on en a fait. André Gide，（Paris：Gallimard，2017［1936/1937］），32.

Oh！To have been there as a simple tourist！Or as a naturalist，overjoyed at recognizing on those high plateaux the“Caucasian scabious”of my garden！...But it is not for this that I traveled to the U.S.S.R..The important thing for me here is man—men—what one can do with them，and what has been done.André Gide，.，trans.Dorothy Bussy（New York：AlfredA.Knopf，1937），14.Translation modi‐fied.

Thus André Gide（1869-1951）claims in his now famous travelogue，’.With such reflections on travel itself，Gide’s book proves to be a turning point in the modern history of travel writing.Travel is no longer about the naturalist-touristic（read：bourgeois）encounters with the“landscapes”of natural sublimes or beauties；it concerns the search for and encounter with humans， the trulyNewHuman；more precisely，the humans of a foreign land are no longer part of the “landscape”to be discovered through the tourist-writer’s heightened self-consciousness—they are what they“do，”what they do differently；they are their historical practice thatmay be a true alternative tomodern civilization.Travelwriting，in turn，nowbecomes a textual and cultural-political engagement in such encounterswith the newhumans and their practice as the newhumans.

As part ofmy comprehensive study of revolutionary travel literature in twentieth-centuryChinese culture，this essay will explore such encounters with the Soviet Humans in a series of travel writings by revolutionary Chinese writers and intellectuals，including Hu Yuzhi 胡愈之（1896- 1986），GuoMoruo 郭沫若（1892-1978），MaoDun 茅盾（1896-1981），and Ding Ling 丁玲（1904 -1986）.In addition，I attempt to situate these encounters in a global genealogy of USSR travelogues in the first half of the twentieth century（a century that is a SovietCentury，that isChina’s revolutionary century，and a short century of radical cultural politics）

Travel means a movement between the familiar and the unknown，a human condition of mo‐bility，and a social-spatial experience of otherness.Travel writing，as an exploration of the foreign and the faraway，has been indispensable to literary modernity since the advent of global transporta‐tion，capitalist domination，and world revolution.Existing scholarship on travel writing has by and large focused on either Western travel literature or non-Western writings on trips to the“ad‐vanced”West，and as a result，preoccupied with the（post）colonial power structures hidden in trav‐el literature.Embracing this emerging field and emphasizing the under-represented relationship between travel writing and revolution in a non-Western context，my study of modern Chinese trav‐el literature seeks to demonstrate another possibility of spatial-political mobility：the possibility of self-liberation，of embracing otherness，of searching for the utopian，of developing a solidarity within the new communities defined not by tradition，empire，or capital but by equality.What un‐derlay the theories and texts traveling from Soviet Russia to China in the first half of the twentieth century was a profound interest—an ideological，cultural-political and spiritual investment—in the transformation of the“Russian Soul”into the New Soviet Human（новый советский человек）not only as an inspiration for the Chinese social struggle but also as an alternative，different future for the wretched of the earth.Out of his translation ofAnatoly Lunacharsvky’s art theory，the great‐est modern Chinese writer Lu Xun 鲁迅（1881-1936）developed a political allegory in which Chi‐na’s Promethean translator uses the foreign fire for a self-critique. WANG Pu，“The Promethean Translator and Cannibalistic Pains：Lu Xun’s‘Hard Translation’as a Political Allego‐ry，” 6，no.3（2013）：324-38.Later on，he famously celebrat‐ed the“ties between Chinese and Russian letters”：in the literature from the“Black Earth，”“we have seen for ourselves：endurance，groans，struggles，revolt，fighting，changes，fighting，construc‐tion，fighting，success.” Lu Xun，，vol.III，trans.YANG Xianyi and Gladys Yang（Beijing：Foreign Languages Press，2003），213.The reverse movement of the travel of the Russian letters into China，as we will show in detail，was the travels of China’s own revolutionary writers and intellectuals to the USSR.Their travel accounts are an intrinsic component of what Lu Xun summarized as“find［ing］people of a different kind”through travel and travel writing；the mind and practice of the Chinese Revolution was connected in a concrete and mobile way with the“infinite land of the faraway”and the“innumerablepeople”ofthefaraway.

It must be immediately added that this new kind of Chinese travel writing was part and parcel of a revolutionary turn in world literature.In the 1920s and 30s，Soviet travelogues became an im‐portant genre in international cultural politics.Many great intellectuals and men of letters went to Soviet Russia to experience this utopian social experiment and came back with their testimony.It should be noted that the very concept of utopia was developed with the trope of imaginary travel.With the rise of the Soviet Union，this utopian imaginary merged into an actual travel experience of the new social formation.Rabindranath Tagore had letters from Red Russia.German Jewish critic Walter Benjamin wrote Moscow Diary，which was posthumously published.French writer Ro‐main Rolland（1866-1944）interviewed Stalin and produced his Voyage à Moscou.Gide’sand his denunciation of Stalinism were back then very controversial，and，for me，the travel ac‐count is more important than his later systematic debates about the Soviet model because it shows us the change of attitude from enthusiasm to disappointment.It must be noted that Gide was disap‐pointedpreciselybecauseforhim Stalin’sSovietUnionwasnotutopianenough，asitfailedtheuto‐pian promise of emancipation and solidarity.In this revolutionary century，a European traveler be‐came someone in search of the actual possibility of radical transformation of capitalist civilization：“Ce qui m’y importe c’est l’homme，les hommes，et ce qu’on en peut faire，et ce qu’on en a fait.”（The done.）André Gide，，32.important thing for me here is man—men—what one can do with them，and what has been

Gorky，Stalin，Ostrovsky

Who was to embody，or in the socialist-realist language，typify，the bridge from the“Russian Soul”toward the New Soviet Man？It was Maxim Gorky（1868-1936），to be sure，the friend of Lenin’sandtheculturalgiantcreditedforendorsingsocialistrealism.Hisimagefiguresprominent‐ly in both French and Chinese accounts.In my study of twentieth-century Chinese travel writings about the Soviet Union，I have been trying to find a point of comparison in the French context.French writer Romain Rolland’sis a good case in point.A French author that eventually became a household name among Chinese literary readers，Romain Rolland was invit‐ed by Gorky to visit the Soviet Union in 1935，the same year that the debates about socialist realism startedtorageinChina’sleftistcommunity.

Rolland’s enthusiasm about the Soviet social experiment，which had never been uncondition‐al，was inseparable from his deep friendship with Gorky，who had finally returned to Soviet Russia in 1932.Rolland left us a number of portraits of the late Gorky.In his effusive praise of Gorky，Rol‐land tried to situate this literary giant in a rich tradition of Russian progressive literature，which was in fact also the precondition for any initial reception of Gorky in China’s New Culture.In 1934 Gorky was enshrined as the leader of the Union of SovietWriters and the father of socialist realism，but in Rolland’s eyes in 1935，this old Russian man talked in“anecdotal” Romain Rolland，（A Trip to Moscow）（Paris：Albin Michel，1992［1935］），143.rather than theoretical terms and had a detached and sometimes gloomy mood.In particular，what the old Gorky cher‐ished most，Rolland tells us，seemed to be the“nostalgia”for his early years as a vagabond wander‐ing in the vast land of Russia.The vagabond years were the source of Gorky’s early work that in‐spired Chinese writers of new literature across the political spectrum.Rolland’s emphasis on a col‐orful，multifaceted Gorky can be seen as a resistance to the Stalinist monopoly of Gorky’s image，and Rolland’s reaction to the Soviet theatrical adaptation ofseems to have been luke‐warm.Nevertheless，his own remembrances of Gorky，published either in such French journals asor posthumously，inevitably became part of the global glorification of Gorky in favor of Stalin’s regime.As is well known，this combination of progressive humanism and Soviet sympa‐thies was at least partly responsible for a phenomenal following of Rolland’s work among Chinese writers，intellectuals，and educated youths.While Rolland was largely forgotten in post-war French literature，the popularity of his work in China continued well into the socialist and even post-socialist eras.The Chinese encounter with Gorky’s work，Rolland’s admiration for Gorky，and finally the reception of Rolland in China，taken together，map out the actuality and mobility of world literature in twentieth-century cultural politics.

Not long afterRolland’s visit，Gorky passed away in 1936.Gidewent to theUSSRfor an international celebration of Gorky’s life.On such an occasion，being on the same stage with Stalin（and his company）was inevitable，even though Gide was to denounce Stalinism.Later，in the 1940s，Guo Moruo，Mao Dun，and Ding Ling，asculturalrepresentativesofthe Chinese Left，allpaid trib‐ute to sites of the Gorky enshrinement，now part of the Soviet cultural establishment；their evalua‐tions of the great Russian-Soviet writer fell in line with the Stalinist official appraisal，thereby lackingthe intimate observations and reflections of Rolland’s.

In 1935，Rolland was candid enough，after his lengthy interviews with Stalin himself，to con‐clude that even Stalin’s own justifications of the“socialism in one country”and the harsh treatment of the citizens were not going to persuade the French mind（“La politique de l’U.R.S.S.ne se préoc‐cupe pas assez de donner à ses amis étrangers les raisons de certaines des ses actions...”）.But ten years later，on the eve of the final victory over militarist Japan，Guo Moruo was keen to report，in his“travel diary”to be published as《苏联五十天》（Fifty Days in the Soviet Union）and then《苏联纪行》（The Soviet Union Travel Journal），that Stalin was in great health.According to Guo，Stalin sat through a long banquet with scholars from around the world in celebration of the Soviet Academy of Sciences；he also stood for hours atop of the Lenin Mausoleum to review the parades. 郭沫若：《苏联五十天》，北京：三联书店，2012［1949］年，第53-54，247-249页。［GUO Moruo，（Fifty Days in the Soviet），Beijing：SDX Joint Publishing，2012（1949），53-54，247-49.］As I argued elsewhere in Chinese，for Guo，the flagbearer of China’s leftist culture in opposition，the emphasis on Stalin’s awe-inspiring physical well-being bordered on a cult of personality for the democratic cause；it was meant to dissipate the uncertainty over the post-war fate of China and East Asia. WANG Pu，“Travel Writing and Socialist Imaginations：On Guo Moruo’s Soviet Travelogues，” 27，no.1（2020）：71-96.In other words，Stalin’s regime was a guaranteed support for theChineseCommunist Party’s struggle for“people’s democracy”inChina and a necessary counterpower to the US hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region.As a result，Stalin appears in Guo’s travel writing not only as a Soviet man but a Soviet fountainhead of“one single will and one single confidence”（一个意志，一个信心）of the“steel-like masses”（钢铁的人群）：“Hurrah，Sta‐lin！”（乌拉，斯大林！）. 郭沫若：《苏联五十天》，第249页。［GUO Moruo，（Fifty Days in the Soviet），249.］

On August 1，1945，Guo paid a visit to the Nikolai Ostrovsky Museum. 同上，第181页。［GUO Moruo，（Fifty Days in the Soviet），181.］Like Gorky—and Lu Xun—Ostrovsky died in 1936.Guo routinely mentioned that Ostrovsky was author of，a novelthatwas to gain even more popularity and influence in China.This sol‐dier-turned-writer was the true incarnation of the Soviet Human：Word was made Flesh.The most touching part of Gide’s search for the“hommes”in’is a section devoted to his visit to the ailing Ostrovsky，a section he wrote with the“most profound respect”（le plus profond respect）. André Gide，（Return from the Soviet Union）（Paris：Gallimard，2017［1936/1937］），90.Gide goes so far as to assert that Ostrovksy“was a saint，”a Soviet saint，and a“proof”（la preuve）.Word was indeed made Flesh—in a physically disabled and painful human body.When Gide stood up，gave Ostrovsky a hug，and left，he knew well that this Soviet friend was so near death—but“the fervor in this feeble body maintains this flame that is nearly extinguishing”（la fer‐veur entretient dans ce corps débile cette flamme près de s’éteindre）.The Soviet human，after all，was not the iconic figure or the cultic leader，but lies in this difficult synthesis of the“body”and the“fervor”in the real people and their real struggles.

An Esperanto Speaker of Moscow and Schoolgirlsfrom Crimea

Like their French counterparts，the leftist Chinese writers and intellectuals“on the road”were keenly aware of the difficulties that beset the USSR ever since its founding.But their focus fell on the heroic effort of Soviet people to overcome the challenges，to carry out the socialist experiment，and to bring utopia into reality.The best-known Chinese witness of the initial，Leninist stage of this great and controversial social-political experiment is Qu Qiubai 瞿秋白（1899-1935），a Chinese writer and intellectual who would become an early leader of the Chinese Communist Party.Rather than offering a utopian depiction，Qu’s two travelogues，which remain to date the most studied works of travel literature of this kind in Chinese，show a young Soviet Russia—a“land of hunger”（饿乡）—thatwas engaged in a desperate struggle for survival in the early 1920s.

HuYuzhi’s《莫斯科印象记》（Impressions of Moscow），another important contribution to Soviet travelogues that became a global genre in the interwar period，turns to ordi‐nary Soviet people and their struggles during Stalin’s First Five-Year Plan（1928-1932）.A leftist representative of the Esperanto movement in China’s May Fourth New Culture，HuYuzhi went in‐to political exile in Europe due to the right-wing Nationalists’campaign against the Communists after the collapse of the revolutionary coalition in 1927.On his way back home in 1931，Hu made strenuous efforts to stop over in Moscow so that he could meet the Soviet Esperanto activists.This journey，therefore，was an extension of the May Fourth Culture and its progressive cosmopolitan‐ism.And he stated at the outset of the travelogue that the greatest reward of this trip was“the discov‐ery of humanity”（人性的发现） 胡愈之：《莫斯科印象记》，上海：新生命书局，1931年，第v页。［HU Yuzhi，（Impressions of Mos‐cow），Shanghai：New Life Bookstore，1931，v.］—even though the beginning of this short stay in Moscow was not necessarily a pleasant one.

Hu’s travel writing offers a detailed record of his first—and perhaps worst—day in Moscow，the red capital city.He is trapped in Soviet bureaucracy.He finds Moscow’s public transportation crowded and dysfunctional and has a chapter titled“Struggles on the Tramcar”（the famous Mos‐cow subway is yet to be built）.He also writes about his first lunch at a worker’s dining hall.It seems that he is not impressed by the cuisine，but what immediately comes to his mind is a comparison with the“overproduction”of food in theWestand the shocking waste of the bourgeois restaurantin‐dustry.He thus expresses his preference for this collective way of food preparation and consump‐tion.By the end of the day，he has first-hand knowledge of the low living standard of the USSR and the daily difficulties facing Moscow city-dwellers，yet as night falls he is still unable to secure a ho‐tel room，despite all his Esperanto friends’efforts to help.Now he is worn out in the bitter cold.And at this moment his Soviet companion，R，speaks to him in Esperanto（recorded in Chinese in his travelogue）：

你在巴黎、柏林那样的大城市安逸惯了，到了这里，一时会感到不舒服罢。其实现在的莫斯科，物质的困难，可以说大半解决了，只有住宅恐慌，使你受了些苦。要是你在十年前，内战饥寒的时期，来到莫斯科，那时你才会遇到难以想像的困苦呢。社会主义现在是正在诞育中。一个小孩产生，都要经过分娩的痛苦，产生一个人类历史上所未曾有过的新社会、新秩序，怎么能不感到困难呢？但是我们苏联的人民却甘心忍受着这些困难。因为我们所得到的精神的快乐，足以抵偿物质的困难而有余。

You are used to being comfortable in metropolitan cities like Paris and Berlin.When you get here，you might feel uncomfortable for a while.As a matter of fact，it is safe to say that as of today material difficulties in Moscow have been tackled by and large.Only the housing panic has somehow made you suffer.If you had come to Moscow a decade ago，in desperate hunger and cold of the Civil War，you would have encountered unimaginable hardships.Socialism is now in its infancy.When a child is born，it has to go through the pain of childbirth.Likewise，how can it not be difficult to generate a new society and new social order that have never existed in human history？But we，the people of the Soviet Union，are willing and all-ready to endure these difficulties.This is because the spiritual happiness we gain are more than enough to compensate for the material difficulties.

R’scompany on hisfirstday in Moscow isacrucialmomentoutofwhich Hu’stravelaccountdevel‐ops.Yes，Hu had come from Paris and Berlin；in advanced Western Europe he had seen the cata‐strophic outcomes of the economic crisis and the rise of fascism.In Moscow he was profoundly moved not by what had been accomplished here，but by the ordinary Soviet people’s optimism in action.His experience，according to his travel writing，is a proof of R’s words.He attributes all their hardship to the“difficult transition”（艰难的过渡期）towards socialism.He believes that all the problems of the Soviet Union are temporary and all the obstacles are just inevitable pains—or birth pangs—on the unprecedented road to a truly humanized society.

At last Hu settles down in a students’hostel at No.2，Fokin Strato.There，an encounter with young Soviets leads to the first climax of his travelogue.The living conditions are not of high quali‐ty，but the cohabitation with many other travelers furnishes an opportunity to develop and cherish friendship，fraternity，and solidarity.Agroup of high school girls from Crimea are also checked in at the hostel and they throw a welcome party for Hu.From the girls and their teachers，he receives warm greetings not only in Russian but also in the Tartar andYiddish tongues.They are truly inter‐nationalist Soviet youths in Hu’s eyes precisely because they are not Russian but consider them‐selves as members of“Oriental or Asian nationalities”formerly oppressed by the Russian Empire and now“freed”by the Soviet Revolution；as a result they have“profound sympathies for the Chi‐nese nation that is now struggling for liberation.”Hu is“moved to tears，”totally“forgetting”the first day’s difficulties and Moscow’s cold.The warm and exciting atmosphere is immediately filled with a transcultural，transnational solidarity-in-making.Later on we are also told that his“roommates”are either from remote Soviet republics or from other foreign countries.They are un‐able to communicate perfectly due to language barriers，but their common language is their identification withthis“newsociety”as the future of humankind.

It is with such real encounters that Hu eventually identified the young Soviet Union as a truly human world vis-à-vis the capitalist exploitative world：“In Moscow，the most astonishing thing is that I encountered many adults who were also great children：innocent，friendly，active，coura‐geous...Some distort materialism，believe the Soviet life is...antihuman.What I saw was the con‐trary...Everyone［in Moscow］is amiable，candid，and enthusiastic”.Rolland also believed that“the Russian Revolution has produced individuals superior to those of the decaying states of Eu‐rope，”but he had no illusions about the new form of the government. Romain Rolland，（A Trip to Moscow），Paris：Albin Michel，1992［1935］，41-42.Yet through his interaction with new friends，Moscow citizens，and Soviet workers，Hu arrived at a whole-hearted defense of the proletarian dictatorship and all its necessary tactics in this transitional period；what mattered most was that a new society was under construction according to the communist ideal.His heart was saddenedwhen he left this promising humanworld for the anti-humanworld，that is，his homelandruled by theGuomindang and the imperialists.

The Utopian and the Realin Soviet Life

In 1936 Gide wrote in the preface tothat the USSR was the land where“the utopia was on its way of becoming reality...” André Gide，（Return from the Soviet Union），18.While Gide was never reluctant to acknowledge Soviet accom‐plishments and the Soviet Union’s role in anti-fascism，he would eventually，after his return，con‐clude that the revolution was“trapped in the sands.”But in 1945，Guo Moruo had no reservation in asserting that“the ancient imagination of the utopia...is reality in the Soviet Union”（古人的乌托邦式的想象……在苏联只是现实）. 郭沫若：《苏联五十天》，第67页。［GUO Moruo，（Fifty Days in the Soviet），67.］Where did Guo find the utopia the most real—and the most hu‐manizing—inthistrip？

Whereas Hu Yuzhi may count as an uninvited visitor to Moscow，Guo，Mao Dun，and Ding Ling were all honored guests of high profile when they toured the Soviet Union.Guo was invited by the SovietAcademy of Science；Mao Dun’s whole trip was arranged by the VOKS，an official or‐gan of cultural exchange；and Ding Ling was travelling as a member of the Chinese delegation to the Women’s International Democratic Federation，an organization founded in Paris and spon‐sored by the Soviet Union.Their trips had a clear function of cultural diplomacy.And，needless to say，the Soviet reception of the three was no less comprehensive and all-inclusive than that of Ro‐main Rolland and Gide.Later on，Guo received the Lenin Peace Award，and Ding Ling received the Stalin Prize for her novel.One may suspect that with their travels so officially prepared and sometimes carefully choreographed，Guo，Mao Dun，and Ding Ling would have less opportunitiestomake spontaneous encounterswith ordinary Soviet people thanHu had.

Indeed，Guo was arranged to“visit many research institutes，museums，factories，collective farms，universities，middle schools，and kindergartens；and to enjoy dramas，operas，puppet shows，music，dance，and paintings；to meet many workers，farmers，scholars，writers，artists，and engineers.”Mao Dun’s stay was extended with even more activities.But in Guo’s travel jour‐nal，the combination of the“utopia”and“reality”finally comes with an interesting observation of theMoscow night life.Guo notes that the Soviet citizens“are great theater-lovers”；“even though there are somany superb theaters，”all the tickets are soon sold out to theworkers.This is a utopia in reality because the Soviet human is not only the industrious builder but also enjoys high culture，because the Soviet human embodies the combination of labor and leisure，political economy and aesthetics：“ I truly admire such citizens，as they truly understand the necessary role of play in life... Their livelihood has security，their job has security...their medical care is government-funded... and therefore，theirwell-deserved reward is surely the pursuit of the just enjoyment of life.”“Utopia” is amodernWestern concept，andGuo links itwith the ancientChinese imagination of the ideal society of great harmony；but his perspective about what is utopian in life has a clear accent on the aesthetic and political ideal of the holistic，rounded development of the human.This Marxist ideal is at least partly traceable to Schiller’s aesthetics and Goethe’s cosmopolitan humanism.And it goeswithout saying that Guowas a pioneer in translating bothGoethe and Schiller into Chinese.

While Guo has long been considered as a romanticist，Mao Dun was by consensus a novelist of realism，studying his subject matter like a social scientist.Unlike Guo’s，Mao Dun’s travelogue，《苏联见闻录》（ATravelAccount of the Soviet Union），is composed not only of travel journals，but a series of essays as case studies.The trip also led to the writing of another book，《杂谈苏联》（Miscellaneous Essays on the Soviet Union）.Mao Dun’s account reads sometimes like a detailed encyclopedia entry about Soviet life，covering as many aspects as possible.It pays particular attention to social structures，institutional developments，policies，and organizations，so much so that the statistical information seems sometimes to overtake the human dimension of this tour.Largely due to the tendency for sociological interviews and the vein of ob‐servational research，this travel writing seems to lack the emotional engagement with the Soviet human.But for Mao Dun the realist，the human is a social being that must be understood within the concreteeconomic，political，andculturalorganizations.

No sooner had Mao Dun boarded the Smolny，the Soviet cargo ship and ocean liner taking him from Shanghai toVladivostok，than he started to do his social survey.The first essay following his travel diary studies the Smolny and its crews as a“a miniature of Soviet society.” 茅盾：《茅盾全集·散文三集》，合肥：黄山书社，2014年，第209页。［MAO Dun，（The Complete Works of Mao Dun·Essay Collection），Hefei：Huangshan Press，2014，209.］The ship has 60 crew members，and Mao Dun is particularly interested in the differences among their salaries（the highest is 3，500 rubles，and the lowest 500 rubles）.He reports that the salary is not defined by rank or title but bywork performanceThe captain has a larger bedroombut the crews have aworkers’clubthat offers a full range of cultural activities.This facility shared and enjoyed by all，accordingtoMao Dun，shows most the“characteristic of the SmolnyHe concludes：“The Smolny...is suggestive of the life ideal and work ethics of the Soviet people.Asociety of only sixty people，as a cell of the Soviet Union，nonetheless deserves our research，doesn’t it？”Throughout all the essays， Mao Dun is focused on the workers’unions，clubs，and other institutional arrangements for the Soviet labormasses.He apparently sees the newSoviet humanity not only fromthe perspective of productivity，but also from an organizational lens of social welfare.It is also worth mentioning that he is amazed to notice that one of the assistant captains of the Smolny is a young Sovietwoman.

From the Soviet Men to the Soviet Women—and to the Soviet Human（Sulian ren）

So far all the travelogues we have been reading are bymale writers and intellectuals.On their trips，Rolland，Gide，Guo andMaoDun also had chances tomeet the leading Russian-Sovietwriters who were also male：Gorky，Ostrovsky，Fadeev，and Simonov，to name a few.This seems to confirm a pattern in the history of travel and literature：the traveling writer tends to be the privileged male.Did the revolutionary dynamic of the twentieth century bring a change to it？Was the Soviet human also a female identity，an accomplishment ofwomen’s liberation？To end this essay， let us turn to a Chinese woman writer traveling to the Soviet Union and the Chinese engagement in the revolutionary gender politics hidden in the Soviet human-in-making.

Ding Ling，usually considered as China’s greatest feminist-communist writer，traveled to Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in 1949 and 1950，amidst the Communist triumph in the War of Liberation and the founding of the People’s Republic of China.She collected all her travel essays in《欧行散记》（Notes on My Trips to Europe）.One of the essays is titled“Sulian de san weinü yingxiong”《苏联的三位女英雄》（Three SovietFemale Heroes）.This essay records Ding Ling’s encounters with three women workers introduced by a“grandmother-looking veteran party member” 丁玲：《丁玲文集》第7卷，长沙：湖南文艺出版社，1991年，第426页。［DING Ling，（Collected Works of Ding Ling），vol.7，Changsha：Hunan Literature and Art Publishing，1991，426.］：the first one from a textile factory，who can control eight machines at a time；the sec‐ond one from a light bulb factory，who has invented new statistic methods；the third one from a silk factory，whoistobecomeanengineer.Allofthem believethattheSovietworkershouldbethemas‐ter of machines and technologies；all of them practice self-teaching.For Ding Ling，they are the true heroes of the Soviet ideal.She gives them the commemorative badges of New China’s found‐ing as souvenirs.Ding Ling’s encounters with the Soviet women continue.At the banquet of the So‐vietWomen’sAnti-Fascism Movement，she talks to a woman and is marveled to find out that she is an airplane pilot.There are also new acquaintances including a female doctor，a female actor，and a female farmer.Ding Ling sees this diverse group as an exemplar of women’s liberation and new hu‐manity：“［The Soviet women］are never separate from production and work，and yet in the mean‐time...they expand their social contacts and visions，thereby elevating their passion for work and their understanding of the whole world.”

One chapter in Mao Dun’sis also devoted to the question of“Soviet woman‐hood.”He defines“the new woman”as“femininity plus motherhood and plus all the good qualities of the male.” 茅盾：《茅盾全集·散文三集》，第613页。［MAO Dun，（The Complete Works of Mao Dun·Essay Collection），613.］This celebration of the Soviet woman，clearly，is still partially trapped in some of the stereotypical gender frames.In contrast，Ding Ling’s fond impressions of the Soviet women who are also anonymous heroes of the USSR is wholly liberated from the traditional perception of mas‐culinity and femininity.

Therefore，it is interesting to see Ding Ling as the Chinese revolutionary woman-travelerwriter offer a summary of the characteristics of the苏联人（“Soviet human”），this time in the gender-neutral Chinese.For Ding Ling，the phrase“Sulian ren”brings up fond memories and signifies great friendships（and sisterhood）.Based on her three trips to the Soviet Union，she sum‐marizes that the Soviet human，“whether male or female，” 丁玲：《丁玲文集》第7卷，第355页。［DING Ling，（Collected Works of Ding Ling），vol.7，355.］is industrious and good at planning.The Soviet people“not only love work，and learning and theory...but also like to enjoy operas，bal‐lets，movies，books，literature，and criticism...”And they are notwithout individualities.Finally， the more she admires the Soviet people，the deeper she loves China and understands the Chinese people’s suffering and struggle，and the harder she hopes to work for China’s rebirth as part of the rebirth of humanity.41With this note，we can conclude our own exploration of the encounters with the Soviet humans inChinese Soviet travelogues as a component of twentieth-centuryworld literature and culture.The search for possibilities of human development，the contact with the new people as the real people，the formation of transnational solidarity through concrete interaction—this is a true intersection of travel，writing，and revolution inmodern Chinese culture，and this is a fundamental desire of the twentieth century as a short leftist century.

Gide，André.’（Return from the Soviet Union）.Paris：Gallimard，2017.

Lu Xun..Vols.I，III，and IV.Translated byYANG Xianyi and GladysYang.Beijing：Foreign Languages Press，2003.

Rolland，Romain.（ATrip to Moscow）.Paris：Albin Michel，1992.

Thompson，Carl..London：Routledge，2011.

WANG Pu.“Travel Writing and Socialist Imaginations：On Guo Moruo’s Soviet Travelogues.”27，no.1（2020）：71-96.

——.“The Promethean Translator and Cannibalistic Pains：Lu Xun’s‘Hard Translation’as a PoliticalAllegory.”6，no.3（2013）：324-38.

丁玲：《丁玲文集》第7卷，长沙：湖南文艺出版社，1991年。

［DING Ling.（Collected Works of Ding Ling）.Vol.7.Changsha：Hunan Literature and Art Publishing，1991.］

郭沫若：《苏联五十天》，北京：三联书店，2012年.

［GUO Moruo.（Fifty Days in the Soviet）.Beijing：SDX Joint Publishing，2012.］

胡愈之：《莫斯科印象记》，上海：新生命书局，1931年。

［HUYuzhi.（Impressions of Moscow）.Shanghai：New Life Bookstore，1931.］

茅盾：《茅盾全集·散文三集》，合肥：黄山书社，2014年。

［MAO Dun.（The Complete Works of Mao Dun·Essay Collection）.Hefei：Huangshan Press，2014.］

瞿秋白：《饿乡纪程》《赤都心史》，见《瞿秋白文集·文学编》第1卷，北京：人民文学，1985年。

［QU Qiubai.“Exiang jicheng”（Journey to the Land of Hunger，1921），“Chidu xinshi”（Spiritual Journey to the Red Capital，1924）.In（Collected Works of Qu Qiubai·Literary Work）.Vol.1.Beijing：People’s Literature，1985.］