第1章 序：向峨的乡村实验无知无畏的承诺
无知无畏的承诺
2008年5月12日下午2:28:01发生的汶川地震把全世界都震撼了！其惨烈程度让所有人震惊：8级地震，超过9万人死亡和失踪，40万人受伤，500万人失去家园。大家目不转睛地关注着，特别是关注学校和孩子们。路易维尔华人社区并不大，平常关心自家以外事情的人也不多，但这次是例外，很快就组织了捐款活动。路易维尔大学中国学生学者联谊会和路易维尔大学筹集的善款，送到了中国大使馆；路易维尔华人基督教会募到的善款，交到了教会联盟的总部；鹤庐亚洲文化中心、美华协会肯印分会、路易维尔姐妹城市协会、核桃街浸信会华人团契等联合起来，成立了路易维尔四川地震救助基金，开始了筹款。
我在非营利性机构从事公益事业多年，每年都要策划筹款活动，体会到开口要钱并不是我的长处，但凭借多年在非营利组织工作的经验，我能够在大路易维尔社区中起一些作用，于是便答应参与发起成立救助基金。
美国有资格公募的慈善基金会很多，大到美国红十字会、United Way（中华慈善基金总会的对口合作基金），小到肯塔基的诸多非营利组织。在他们做好事的过程中，也时不时会暴露出资金管理和运作上的一些小问题。通常，基金会都会在捐款里面按一定的百分比留款作为营运经费。我们在募捐时，为了对捐款人负责，出于热情，更出于无知，我们雄心勃勃地向公众郑重承诺：每一分钱都会直接用在灾区人民身上。我们对此深信不疑，我们深知每一分钱都来之不易，我们在募捐资料上说，在电视采访时也这样说。
面对这无知无畏的承诺，唯一的办法就是建立志愿者团队。我们没有大队人马，没有财力做后盾，那就得自己带头，量力而行。从一开始我就清楚地感觉到：唯有自己，才是最可靠的劳动者；唯有自己，才是项目得以推行的基本保障。6年来，路易维尔向峨小学项目一直在进行后续的特色教育活动，我们的志愿者团队，从未用过基金里的一分钱，相反，为了开展这些活动，一直在持续不断地自己花钱来保证项目得以进行：我自己是这样做的，我们的志愿者，也是这样做的。
今天往回看，我才意识到我自己其实很失败：路易维尔这边不屈不挠执行这个项目的，从头到尾只有我一个人。救助基金委员会的人，除了动动口，就没有动手的，凡事都需要我自己亲力亲为，这实在是出于光杆司令的无奈。正是在这样的情况下，我们从未停止过对向峨小学音乐、美术、英语、英文图书馆的特色建设，而支撑着我有滋有味地做下去的，恰恰正是这许许多多不在路易维尔却让我感动的志愿者和合作者，他们的理解、参与、支持和持之以恒、踏踏实实的工作，让我感觉到了我们是一个志同道合的志愿者团队，我们从不孤单。
我想，这是一种责任感。
An Innocent Promise The devastating Wenchuan Earthquake stunned the world and created relentless, 24-hour focus on media reports. The quake at 2:28:01 PM on Monday, May 12, 2008, measured at 8.0 magnitude, caused more than 90,000 people to die or to be missing, injured nearly 400,000, and made about 5,000,000 individuals homeless. Schools and buildings collapsed, bridges and highways broke apart, and faces of the injured and dead emerged from the ruins. The bloody tragedy was so extensive that the horrific visual impact pummeled our hearts with concern while we especially worried about the safety of children in the schools.
The Chinese community in Louisville, Kentucky is relatively small, and usually the local residents are focused mostly on their own businesses. But this time it was different. The community quickly organized fundraising activities for the victims of the terrible natural disaster. The Chinese Students and Scholars Association at the University of Louisville and the University itself raised over$1,000 and sent it to the Chinese Embassy in the United States, The Louisville Chinese Christian Church collected donations from its members and submitted them to the affiliated church organization headquarters. With help from the Department of Neighborhoods of the Louisville Metro Government, the Louisville Sichuan Earthquake Relief Fund was established and a call for donations for victims was sent out via email. Crane House—The Asian Institute set up a special account for the Relief Fund. And the Organization of Chinese Americans—Kentuckiana Chapter, Sister Cities of Louisville, and the Chinese Fellowship of the Walnut Street Baptist Church planned a joint fundraising event.
I had been active in community service and volunteered at nonprofit organizations for many years, but I knew that asking for donations was my weakest skill. In response to the Wenchuan Earthquake, I was not the first to propose the establishment of the Relief Fund, but when I was asked to serve on the organizing committee of the Relief Fund, I agreed to take part in the initiative because I thought that my experience in the nonprofit sector and my connections within the Greater Louisville community at-large might have been helpful. Many nonprofit organizations in the States do charitable work.National organizations such as the American Red Cross, the United Way (counterpart to the China Charity Foundation), and other smaller local organizations in Kentucky, all have specific missions that make invaluable contributions to the community. Although from time to time the media may expose problems of donation-related mismanagement, most of the organizations follow regulations and laws rigorously. To cover administrative expenses, a nonprofit organization commonly retains a small percentage of the funds it raises.
When the organizing committee of the Relief Fund met to plan its activities, we realized how valuable each penny would be for the mission and how important it was for us to earn the trust of donors. Thus, out of passion and perhaps ignorance, we made the promise that 100% of the donations we collected would go directly to the victims of the earthquake. We stated the promise on all the informational flyers, announced it at every fundraising function, and publicly declared the promise during interviews with television and newspaper reporters.
Who represented the Louisville Sichuan Earthquake Relief Fund?We were just a small group of volunteers who were passionate about helping people in the earthquake region. We had no staff or funding to stage big fundraising events. We, the members of the Organizing Committee, became the planners, the organizers, and the staff, doing everything ourselves:brown bag luncheons at places such as UPS and law offices; yard sales; handmade donation boxes at restaurants; phone calls and email messages. Not long after we started, we all knew that in order to keep the promise of giving 100% of the donations directly to the earthquake victims, we would have to be cooperatively hands-on and would have to undertake each and every tiny task personally. That would be the only way we could fulfill the promise. And, indeed, we did it all with our own hands.
Today, since we have cleared all of the hurdles and changed all of the impossibilities to reality, I am very proud of the fact that we actually did it. However, when I look back, I also realize that the activities were so taxing that I personally was a failure. Even though I understood the limitations of volunteers and appreciated the moral support from members of the Louisville Relief Fund, I was still unable to keep a strong and effective leadership role for the Louisville component while I was in China completing the mission of the Relief Fund. Of course, I was not really alone doing a one-man show, as I appreciated all the support at every step from non-committee people, whether in Louisville, in the States, or in China. Looking back, I never lacked people who were always interested in helping. That was my team, ever strong to lend me constant support and to get their feet wet in any project, no matter if it were in the States or in China. The donors, volunteers and supporters were the ones who motivated me all along and made me feel that I was not alone. After all, the promise, regardless of how innocent, was a responsibility every one of us took seriously.
向峨的乡村实验
这不是一本抗震救灾的书。地震的悲与伤不是能“抗”的战斗。
一定要归类的话，本书是以地震后一所学校的人文建设为契机，对今天中国乡村建设与艺术教育所进行的观察。向峨学校生死轮回，前世今生，给了我们一个观察乡村的角度与机会。向峨学校接受了无数人的捐赠，有了一流的硬件。但是它不是“模范”，不是“样板”，它是一个充满“人文”的所在，一个充满“艺术”的角落，一个充满“真诚”的未来。我们能分享的不只是随灾难而来的“爱心”与“历史”。梁漱溟说：“乡村建设，实非建设乡村，而意在整个中国社会之建设。”面对向峨，我们思考一个乡村里的中国。
梁漱溟说：“乡村建设，实非建设乡村，而意在整个中国社会之建设。”面对向峨，我们思考一个乡村里的中国。
地震后去向峨的时候，我们听到一个新鲜的说法，村民说今天的生活是在“倒时差”。2008年地震后，物质条件的飞跃，有人夸张地说往前飞了50年。这样的穿越，肯定有点不适应，所以就有“倒时差”一说。在向峨学校漂亮的校门口我还听说了这样一个故事：下午放学的时候，有一个孩子跑出校门不远摔了一跤，家长气冲冲地赶来学校，当着老师们的面就给了孩子一个耳光，并且大声骂道：“要摔你也早一步在门里面摔啊，你个不争气的家伙！”
讲这些故事不是在指责谁的不是，而是想传达今天乡村的现场声音。故事让我想起晏阳初在20世纪30年代说的一段话：“有些人把农村运动，看作就是‘办模范村’。固然，把一个破旧不堪，又穷又苦的农村，费一些人力，用一些金钱，把它救济起来，收拾起来，整理起来，焕然一新，作其他农村改良的模范，谁能说这样的办法，没有好影响呢？可是办模范村，不过是限于当地的特殊事情，虽说它能给周围以好影响好刺激，但是没有什么普遍远大的意义。若竟把农村运动全看作就是办模范村，这又未免把农村运动的普遍性和远大性忽视了。”
乡村的一切早就在那里躺着，只是巨大的灾难撕开了麻木的面孔，让问题凸显在镜子里，你可以觉得它只是镜像，也可以从镜子里看见自己真实的样子。黄仁宇有一个说法，他感觉中国今天所有的问题都是文化与体制的翻新。而且这种新包括顶层的国家建构，更应该关注中国社会、中国农村的重建。百年来的乡村，梁漱溟开出的药方是“乡村自治”；晏阳初践行“平民教育”；董时进组建农民的政党。最后这些个人化的实验都被宣布失败，在大一统的方式里历经波折。今天我们再来看这些历史的实验，仿佛就是今天所有乡村故事都有了最合乎逻辑的解释。本书视野中的向峨说到底是一个关于乡村教育的实验。陶行知的一段话告诉我们，我们当警醒：“中国乡村教育走错了路！他教人离开乡下向城里跑，他教人吃饭不种稻，穿衣不种棉，做房子不造林；他教人羡慕奢华，看不起务农；他教人分利不生利；他教农夫子弟变成书呆子；他教富的变穷，穷的变得格外穷；他教强的变弱，弱的变得格外弱。前面是万丈悬崖，同志们务须把马勒住，另找生路！”
From Xiang-E to Countryside Schools
This book is not about the topic of earthquakes and conducting rescues. Nor is the book about the sorrow and anguish that all earthquakes can produce. Rather, the stories in this book revolve—to a lesser extent—around the Chinese spirit within the Chinese countryside and the physical reconstruction of an elementary school campus after China's 2008 Great Wenchuan Earthquake, and—to a greater extent—around how those rebuilding efforts created unique and significant educational opportunities for a remote, mountainous countryside village school. That village school is Xiang-E Elementary ("Xiang-E"meaning "facing loftiness") in China's southwest Sichuan Province.
After the earthquake, worldwide response was swift and varied from technical support, search-and-rescue, food, clothing, first aid, to services and other aid. While the exterior aspects of the Xiang-E School campus were undergoing rebuilding, the internal aspects, i.e. education and learning, also were experiencing significant, innovative revamping. New concepts, near- and far-sighted visions, struggles, cooperative efforts, plan coordination and more, including teacher and student gains, all contributed to making the small rural Xiang-E School a model of "firsts"for all of China.
Since 2008, the school in Xiang-E Village continues to be steeped in a student-focused learning atmosphere that is palpable from the playground to every corner of the campus. Through this book, we share what can spring from an earthquake—the reconstruction, the labors of love—that transcend devastation. As once stated by Liang Shuming, an early Republic of China teacher of rural restructuring,"Rural reconstruction is not only about rebuilding the countryside;rebuilding the countryside rebuilds all of China."And, Xiang-E Village is the epitome of China's countryside.
When we visited Xiang-E Village after the earthquake, we learned a new term: "backward jet lag."After the calamity in 2008, many physical conditions greatly improved in Xiang-E, with some villagers even commenting that their lives had taken a 50-year leap forward. So, the people deemed that they were experiencing a "backward jet lag."
A villager told me a story when I was standing at the beautiful new gate of Xiang-E School. The tale goes like this:
One afternoon when school ended, a child ran toward the gate and fell immediately outside the entrance. His parents hurried to the child, gave him a disciplinary tap, and in front of the teachers, loudly chided, "You are a disappointing boy. If you want to fall, at least you should fall inside the gate! "
Of course, the story had nothing to do with punishment. The anecdote is, however, a reflection of how the villagers today express authentic feelings of pride for their new school and surroundings. The story reminds me of what Mr. Yan Yangchu said in the 1930s:
"Some villagers see rural construction only as building a 'model village.' Applying labor and some money to replace a worn out, weary village does result in a brand new-looking countryside. Maybe later, the improvement could even be considered a model for other villages. However, has anyone gained any real benefits?
"On the other hand, what would be invaluable to a village is to start from the outset to design and build a model village. It could influence other villages around it, even though it may not immediately influence everyone everywhere. Therefore, if the only objective of rural reconstruction is to rebuild and incidentally create a model village, then we will ignore everyone everywhere and lose the long-term benefits of countryside reform."
Everything in the countryside has been there for centuries. It has experienced great disasters that have destroyed its features in the same way that a deformed person looking into a mirror recognizes the outline of his face, but the image is no longer the same, and yet the reflection still represents the true person underneath.
Several contemporary reform advocates have discussed the role that the countryside has played in modernizing China. Ray Huang (a.k.a. Dr. Ray Huang, a former Chinese military official who subsequently taught at New York State University, Columbia University and Harvard University) felt that all of China's current problems could be traced to previous cultural and systemic reforms. Additionally, the national reconstruction movement added to the situation. He thought that more emphasis should have been placed on improving the countryside and Chinese society as a whole.
More than 100 years ago, Mr. Liang Shuming, an early rural reconstruction advocate, originated the concept of "rural self-government; " Mr. Yan Yang-chu (a.k.a. Y. C. James Yen) formed the National Association of Mass Education Movement (MEM) and organized village campaigns; and, Dong Shi-jin, a sociologist, tried to organize farmer movements. Unfortunately, the actions taken by these men and others failed after many twists and turns. Today, we have the benefit of historical reference to analyze what these men did, thus we can better understand what had been happening in the countryside in earlier days.
This book provides a platform from which one can observe changes in rural education. To quote Mr. Tao Xingzhi (born Tao Zhixing, renowned 20th Century Chinese scholar, educator and reformer):
"The route for Chinese rural education is completely wrong! It teaches people to leave the countryside for the city, to eat but not to plant rice, to wear but not to plant cotton, to build houses but not to plant trees. It teaches people to admire lavish life and to look down on farmers. It teaches people to divide but not to create profits, to change farmers into bookworms, to change the rich into the poor—and the poor become even poorer, to change the strong into the weak—and the weak get even weaker. We must stop this runaway horse, because up ahead is an unimaginable cliff. We must find another way to approach rural life."