Advertisement
Advertisement
From our archives
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
The mausoleum of Sun Yat-sen in Nanjing, in 1930. Pictures: Alamy; Simon Song

The day Sun Yat-sen died, leaving China like ‘the play without Hamlet’

When the founding father of the Republic of China died, some mourned him, while others condemned him. The South China Morning Post weighed the arguments and delivered its own judgment

Chris Wood

“News of the death of Dr Sun Yat-sen reached Hongkong at noon yesterday,” announced a story in the South China Morning Post on March 13, 1925.

While Sun’s life is well documented and posterity would be his judge, commentary by the Post‘s editorial writer offers a window on how he was viewed in the moment.

“Without him China will seem for a time ‘the play without Hamlet’,” they wrote. “In all the capitals of the world to-day, pens will be busy appraising him. Orthodoxy will dictate adherences to that old adage ‘De mortuis nil nisi bonum’; but therein will lie the test of [his] greatness. It is only of the incon­sider­able that the biographers say nothing but good [...]

A huge Sun Yat-sen portrait is erected at Tiananmen Square to mark May Day in Beijing in 2012.
“We have before us appreciations and condemnations of him, varying as widely as the poles stand apart. ‘A born intriguer,’ says one, ‘one of the great adventurers of the ages, a Borgia born late and born yellow. An intriguer by instinct, a revolutionary by profession and a muddler by habit, Sun has never yet struck a decisive blow for any cause, and it is safe to say he never will.’

“Against that, we have this from another pen: ‘Father of the Revolution, Sun is a statesman, a hero and a martyr. Alone in all the contesting leaders in China he has no axe to grind. He asks nothing for himself: he is of the people and for the people.’ The true estimation of him probably lies between those extremes, and nearer the latter. […]

“Much derogatory of Sun has been written in Hongkong during the last few years – at best he was an impractical dreamer; at worst, a fraud. His chief fault, however, would seem to have been that he failed so pathetic­ally: [...] it has been said no reformer in any country had such opportunities as Sun, nor made less use of them. Ourselves, however, have ven­tured to question whether, in like circum­stances, Napoleon, Cromwell, Garibaldi, Washington would not have failed. […] We can, therefore, judge Sun kindly and concede that the dice were against him, driving him to the despera­tion of a man who plays a losing game.”

Post