ㅤ
Recently, journalist Chai Jing (柴静) produced a program about the Chinese woman writer Eileen Chang (张爱玲), revealing some details of Chang's life before and after she left China and sparking considerable discussion. Chang's departure from mainland China in 1952, followed by her journey through Hong Kong to the United States, has been a popular topic on the Chinese-language internet in recent years. It also reflects one aspect of the recent phenomenon of “Runology” in China.
ㅤ
Chai Jing, a former reporter for China Central Television (CCTV) who moved to Europe many years ago, is herself a prominent figure among a new generation of Chinese emigrants known as “run people.” Her production of a program about the circumstances surrounding Eileen Chang's departure from China carries a sense of kinship born of shared adversity. It also connects and echoes the history of Chinese people leaving their homeland across several decades and generations.
ㅤ
The Chinese internet slang term “run” (润) is a phonetic borrowing from the English word “run,” meaning to flee or escape. It refers to leaving or preparing to leave one's Chinese homeland to escape difficulties or even disasters and seek a new life elsewhere, whether in another region or another country. The information, knowledge, and discussions concerning how to “run,” where to “run,” and the history of such departures are collectively known as “Runology” (润学), while those who are leaving or have already left are colloquially called “run people” (润人).
ㅤ
Eileen Chang was one of the most famous among the large numbers of “run people” who fled mainland China during the wave of departures surrounding the dramatic upheavals of 1949. Another intellectual giant, Hu Shih (胡适), along with figures such as Qian Mu (钱穆), Fu Sinian (傅斯年), and Ni Kuang (倪匡), as well as many less prominent intellectual elites and ordinary people, also left mainland China during that period, heading to Taiwan, Hong Kong, Europe, the United States, and other parts of the world.
ㅤ
Their lives in Hong Kong, Taiwan, or the West were not necessarily very happy, but they escaped the brutal political storms, famines, and shortages that would engulf mainland China over the following decades, and spent the latter halves of their lives in relative stability. Eileen Chang, for example, lived until 1995. Hu Shih and some others died earlier only because of illness. There were also Chinese scholars based in the United States, such as Tsung-Dao Lee (李政道) and Chen-Ning Yang (杨振宁), who did not return to China in the first place, as well as Charles K. Kao (高锟), who, like Eileen Chang, first went to Hong Kong and then to the United States. In the relatively free and prosperous environments outside mainland China, they achieved remarkable accomplishments and even received the distinction of winning Nobel Prizes.
ㅤ
By contrast, Chinese people from various social classes who remained on the mainland or returned from abroad, particularly intellectual elites such as Lao She (老舍), Chen Yinke (陈寅恪), Shen Congwen (沈从文), Ding Ling (丁玲), Yao Tongbin (姚桐斌), Zhao Jiuzhang (赵九章), and Chen Tianchi (陈天池), suffered through successive disasters, including the Campaign to Suppress Counterrevolutionaries (镇反), the Anti-Rightist Campaign (反右), the Great Famine (大饥荒), and the Cultural Revolution (文革). Some died tragically, while others survived but were left deeply scarred. The contrast makes the good fortune of Eileen Chang and other “run people,” and the misfortune of those who stayed behind, all the more striking. Many people on the Chinese-language internet enthusiastically discuss these figures and their histories, clearly using them to allude to contemporary China and reflect the attitudes of some Chinese people today.
ㅤ
The rise of “Runology” in recent years stems from the stagnation of China's reforms and its pronounced economic downturn, particularly the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the “zero-COVID” policies, including lockdowns, which have made people's lives generally more difficult and deprived them of hope. Many Chinese people whose rights and interests have been harmed are disappointed with China's current situation, and quite a few hope to leave the country and seek opportunities abroad. The experiences of earlier “run people” such as Eileen Chang and Hu Shih have inspired them and become examples to follow. They praise Chang and others for their foresight, for not being deceived by sweet talk and false promises into remaining on the mainland, and for “running away” in time to avoid subsequent disasters. They even jokingly call Chang, Hu Shih, and others “pioneers of Runology” and “anti-scam pioneers.”
ㅤ
It is emotionally understandable that many Chinese people, for various reasons, hope to “run” out of China and admire earlier “run people” such as Eileen Chang. However, their understanding of the history and reality of emigration is actually biased and idealized, and does not entirely correspond to the facts.
ㅤ
Take Eileen Chang as an example. Although leaving China did spare her the impact of subsequent political campaigns, she faced a meager income and financial hardship in the unfamiliar environment of the West. She never again produced any widely celebrated literary works, and spent the following decades living a relatively quiet and withdrawn life. This stood in sharp contrast to her years in China, when she produced outstanding works one after another and rapidly rose to fame. To a large extent, this was because she had left behind the people, places, and social environment of her homeland, as well as the linguistic world of her mother tongue—all of which had nourished her literary creativity and provided the conditions in which she could thrive. She became like water cut off from its source or a tree severed from its roots.
ㅤ
Although Eileen Chang was fluent in English, she was still more accomplished in Chinese writing than in expressing herself in a foreign language. The pressures and everyday concerns of life in the United States also left her with little leisure or peace of mind for writing. Chang, who had lived in relative obscurity in America, regained prominence in her later years and after her death largely because Chinese academic circles rediscovered her work and Chinese readers embraced it. This, in turn, stimulated Western interest in and research on her.
ㅤ
It can be said that, for a writer of such stature, Eileen Chang's life after leaving China for the United States was uneventful and somewhat desolate, and her career was not particularly successful. Among the other, less famous “run people,” some achieved success, while others experienced lives that were far from smooth or satisfactory. It is simply that successful individuals tend to remain in the spotlight and receive more attention both in their countries of residence and in China, while those who struggle are overlooked, and often deliberately withdraw from public attention themselves, remaining largely unknown.
ㅤ
Whether the fate of “run people” is fortunate or unfortunate, and whether their lives are good or bad, is often determined by the broader circumstances of their times, over which they have little control. For example, China experienced another wave of emigration during the 1980s and 1990s. At the time, many believed that China was heading toward collapse while Europe and America represented paradise. Moreover, the gap in economic development and living standards between China and foreign countries was indeed enormous. Many preferred to live in basements and wash dishes for a living abroad rather than return to China.
ㅤ
Among those who left China at that time were quite a few elites from within the political system and broader society, who were willing to abandon their privileged positions at home in order to “run” to developed countries. However, China's economy subsequently took off and its society became more stable. People of similar social standing who remained in China generally seized opportunities to become wealthy and achieved greater success than those who had drifted overseas. This forms a striking contrast with the entirely different fates of those who chose to stay or “run away” around 1949.
ㅤ
The differences in their fates were determined by the choices made and policies adopted by China's rulers at critical historical junctures, by conditions in the countries to which they emigrated—particularly those countries' attitudes toward immigrants—and by the relative levels and trajectories of development in China and abroad. These outcomes were not the result of individual effort, nor were they developments that individuals could accurately foresee or meaningfully influence. Eileen Chang and Hu Shih could not have foreseen with any great certainty what would later happen in China. They simply made choices between leaving and staying based on their personal preferences and aversions.
ㅤ
If China's rulers in the 1990s had closed the country off from the outside world, intensified the persecution of dissidents, and allowed the economy to collapse and development to stagnate, those who “ran” to foreign countries would have been regarded as “wise” and “fortunate,” while those who stayed would have suffered fates similar to those who remained in the 1950s. Conversely, if China's rulers in the 1950s had refrained from mass arrests and killings and instead treated intellectuals and respected members of society well, as they had solemnly promised in 1949 and earlier, those who stayed or returned from abroad would have been entrusted with important responsibilities. Those who “ran” to Hong Kong, Taiwan, the United States, or Europe would instead have been seen as people who had “failed to recognize the direction of the times,” missing valuable opportunities to achieve distinction and accomplish great things, and spending the rest of their lives in disappointment and marginalization. Given the historical circumstances and preceding developments, all these hypothetical scenarios were entirely plausible. The happiness and disasters actually experienced by those who stayed or left in the real course of history were not easy to predict.
ㅤ
After the end of the COVID-19 pandemic and China's lifting of its COVID-related restrictions, however, the “run people” of this new wave have been relatively unfortunate. They are confronting a global wave of conservative, xenophobic populism, including in Europe, the United States, and Japan. From national policies to individual attitudes, countries have become increasingly unfriendly toward immigrants and refugees.
ㅤ
For example, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has carried out extensive arrests of undocumented immigrants, and many Chinese people who entered the United States illegally through irregular migration routes have been detained in immigration detention centers. Japan has substantially raised the requirements for business management visas and permanent residency, even applying some changes retroactively, leaving many Chinese people who “ran” to Japan out of admiration for the country devastated and with nowhere to turn. European countries have also tightened their immigration policies, making it increasingly difficult for both regular immigrants and refugees in exile to obtain long-term residence status, leaving their futures uncertain. The social atmosphere in countries around the world has also shifted from supporting diversity and welcoming outsiders to hostility toward those perceived as different and widespread racial discrimination.
ㅤ
Moreover, even liberal exiles who oppose China's political system and people who are pro-American, pro-Japanese, or pro-European are subjected to discrimination and exclusion. Xenophobia in various countries is primarily directed at people's ethnicity and place of birth rather than their political positions. Chinese “run people” are not necessarily welcomed or accepted simply because they admire freedom and democracy or feel an affinity with their host countries. Exceptions may be made for a small number of individuals deemed useful to the host country, but such cases do not represent the experience of the majority.
ㅤ
Even setting aside these recent political and social trends, Chinese people who move to foreign countries face numerous difficulties and obstacles in unfamiliar environments. Differences in language, culture, customs, and other aspects of life create considerable inconvenience. Democracy is not a universal remedy, either. Democratic countries also suffer from class divisions, the uglier aspects of human nature, bureaucracy, various forms of discrimination, and injustice. Chinese “run people” who arrive in foreign countries full of admiration for the free world must still worry about food, clothing, housing, transportation, and interpersonal conflicts.
ㅤ
Many Chinese people who enjoyed reasonably respectable lives at home, with some resources and personal connections, find that their resources and skills are almost entirely “reset to zero” after “running” abroad. They must start everything from scratch, often experiencing downward social mobility and being forced to undertake physically demanding and low-status work. In the process of adapting to rules, social conventions, and ways of dealing with people that differ considerably from those in their homeland, many “run people” inevitably have to learn costly lessons through bitter experience.
ㅤ
For example, Yuan Tengfei (袁腾飞), a well-known Chinese liberal public figure who had previously expressed great admiration for the United States, received an exorbitant medical bill from an American hospital shortly after moving there. He could not help venting his anger and dissatisfaction in a furious post on WeChat Moments. Although European Union countries generally offer better healthcare coverage and require less out-of-pocket spending, their healthcare systems suffer from inefficiency. Beyond healthcare, many sectors in Europe and America have problems unfamiliar to outsiders, which people only discover through firsthand experience, including inefficiency, complicated procedures, and racial discrimination.
ㅤ
Many Chinese “run people” only realize the gap between their ideals and reality after actually arriving in Europe, America, Japan, or other countries, and feel deeply disappointed. Within these Chinese emigrant and exile communities, conflicts also arise over competing interests, political differences, and personal grievances, leading people to scheme against and harm one another. There are many other hardships and sufferings that are difficult to put into words. As a Chinese person living away from home in Western Europe, I have considerable firsthand experience of these realities. Some Chinese people who have already “run” choose to return to China because life in foreign lands has become too difficult, painful, and hopeless.
ㅤ
Whether Eileen Chang and Hu Shih in the past, Yuan Tengfei and Chai Jing today, or the many lesser-known Chinese “run people” who have left their homeland, they have all departed from familiar surroundings for foreign lands, whether in pursuit of freedom or a livelihood, to escape disaster or seek a new beginning. They have escaped some forms of suffering only to encounter other hardships; gained some of what they sought while losing things they never wanted to lose; some have been relatively fortunate and happy, while others have experienced misfortune and hardship; some struggle to establish roots in foreign countries, while others return to their homeland. Still others have no permanent home, cannot return to the place they once called home, and remain caught in uncertainty between “running” and “returning”...
ㅤ
Fundamentally, the many crises and problems within China's political system and society, particularly the lack of democracy and freedom, and the fact that the lower and middle strata of society endure so much hardship while receiving so little in return, are the reasons why many Chinese people choose to uproot themselves and leave their homeland behind, “running” to other places. Yet many Chinese people also harbor excessively idealized visions of the West, as well as Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and other destinations, and have overly high expectations of freedom, democracy, and their effectiveness. These expectations differ significantly from reality.
ㅤ
Most Chinese people living in foreign lands do not lead particularly satisfactory lives. Leaving China has not freed them from constant busyness and anxiety. Their futures are full of uncertainty, and their lives are like wild grass and drifting duckweed, uprooted and adrift, without a sense of identity or belonging. Ultimately, the hope for a happier future for the Chinese people lies in reform and progress within mainland China itself.
ㅤ
(The author, Wang Qingmin (王庆民) , is a Chinese writer based in Europe and a researcher of international politics. The original article was written in Chinese. The English translation contains minor revisions.)
