(1) History
The word "story" comes from "history"; but the word "history" does not come from "his-story." In Greek, the word "historia" was derived from the root "histor," the latter meaning "knowing, learned, wise man, judge"; and "historia" itself referred to "a learning or knowing by INQUIRY," and by extension, "an ACCOUNT of one's inquiries, narrative, history." The word was then taken up in Latin, by direct transliteration; but its reference was slightly changed, referring now to a "NARRATIVE of past events, account, tale, story"; the original reference to "learning" or "inquiry" dropped out, but any event, and not only an inquiry, could now be the subject of history. The word later entered English with pretty much the Latin scope of reference; and "story" is but an aphetic form of "history." The "hi" or "his" in the word "history" has nothing to do with any English pronoun whatsoever.
(2) The Sense of History
If the sense of history prevails in a civilization, it will not be impaired by the demolition of a clock; if the sense of history has already languished, no clock, no preservation of any clock could save it. No clock indeed could save that sense flowing out of Dong Qiao's pen, or that sense wobbling through the air when Li Wo spoke; for that sense, to keep it, does not dwell in a clock, not in the banners surrounding a clock; but in the web of meanings which come most naturally to the minds dwelling therein, meanings which they will at ease pick up, allude to, feel through, write about, not on a banner nor in an academic paper, but very ordinarily, in the very mode of living, thinking, and speaking.
To appraise how much sense of history young people nowadays have, we do not interview them how they look upon the clock, or whether they believe that the clock should be demolished or no. We instead listen to their conversations in university canteens, on the streets, in private gatherings, in public pronouncements, in the way they relate themselves to the totality of meanings (and not only visible and tangible artifacts) from the past.
To gain a sense of the past, it is not enough to study past objects, putting them into theoretical categories, handy for seminar presentations. A music student today, to instance just this, may speak splendidly of the history of music, citing documents, pointing to Beethovenhaus or Brahmshaus which he has just visited, cutting eighty or so years into the Classical and the Romantic, this way or that, describing a Bach mass in the vocabulary of latest music theories; and yet, he may still lack a sense of the past completely. Indeed I say, completely. For he is thoroughly but an observer. He has not tried to feel through how a mass was written; he has not related his innermost part to that something in the past which could hardly be captured by the visible and the tangible.
Many people visit Europe every year. And from them we hear happy reports of wonderful museums, of magnificent buildings, of food, of lodging, of worth-seeing sites old and new. They probably gain a sense of Europe; not necessarily though a sense of history.
Many believers in the Christian religion understand that their Faith has a long history; nay, indeed that their Faith is grounded in a set of historical events. They may long to visit Israel today, or Rome, or Corinth, or Ephesus, so to walk the way the Lord and the Apostles once walked; and after which, like tourists, they are satisfied; for, like pilgrims, they have paid visit to the worthy places. The sense of history, however, need not have taken root in their hearts thereby. The vicissitude of the Church, the complexity of the events surrounding the birth and death of Jesus, even the very episodes, absent which they would today not have to choose, if indeed they consciously did, between the Roman Church and other churches: these things rarely interest them, any more than, say, the story behind the Star Ferry Clock would interest many young people of our time.
But the sense of history, I say, is neither in a Beethovenhaus, nor in an Arc de Triomph, nor in an account of the Crucifixion, nor in a Clock; we can have all those things well preserved, and still lack a sense of history. For then we will leave behind, for our children, a very good museum, as large as the whole of HK, or any city we happen to dwell in; and make the children but happy visitors. The sense of history may probably swell in certain moments; but ordinarily, it will be very far from them; they will still be quite alergic to being deemed old-fashioned.
The sense of history resides not in things, but in minds. It reflects how a person sees time, sees the significance of things past for his very being here and now, a significance intimate and diffused. It takes the form of a relationship, wherein the person wishes to take them in the past as contemporaries, as partners in a conversation, their views and their sayings, their moods, their values, their small deeds and heroic, their own ways of relating to their past: all these the person wishes to participate in, against any presumption that they deserve only to be an object of study.
That many ancient artifacts had long been demolished, did not hinder Du Fu from writing nostalgically, with a genuine sense of history. The sense flows out from his finding himself part of a larger whole in time, sustained by a culture which treasured history in a living way. Jews having lost most of their historical artifacts, did not fail to develop a very strong sense of history; one book, and they can anywhere in the world re-build their community, connecting it with all those prevenient.
History overcomes mundane existence; it nourishes the soul. But it so nourishing, is not itself to be nourished by a grand museum. To preserve a clock, some will eagerly fight; but to preserve, nay, to foster, the sense of history, many would not be prepared to alter their relationship to time, not in some concentrated moments, but in their ordinary existence. A few years past, I wrote of history and historical education. There are bits which I wish I would not disown any day in the future.
若夫秉其狐筆。奮厥鴻才。燼十九年之光陰。聿資皇業。囊數萬里之風物。用紀方輿。定名制而實齋。考山川而霞客。必循脈絡。細顯源流。懼後世以佚亡。談遷再寫。惡前書之疏缺。永叔重修。史家之心。著者之跡。庶不愧乎千秋以下而已。其有憂乎吾道之孤者乎。薺麥多悲。況杜郎以俊賞。蒹葭遽老。何屈子其遠求。竹杖挑燈。外塵軀之禍福。風檐展卷。凜霜節於丹青。紹百代之精神。養一生之氣度。蕭蕭落木。終黃土以為根。漾漾扁舟。寧滄波而亡櫂。煦西湖之歌舞。輒醉游人。冽北國之風光。堪移處士。履荒煙兮野蔓。臨廣漠兮一身。
嗚呼。楮墨猶存。風燈寡續。寄塵滾滾。形骸赴僥倖之鄉。逐浪滔滔。名利翻沉浮之域。高山則沐猴群笑。淺水則錦鯉爭翔。溫柔敦厚之教已衰。誠正修治之功莫致。壘壘史乘。痛輕薄之青襟。葉葉杏壇。愧艱辛之白骨。斷鴻聲裡。厭終古之斜陽。下馬碑前。趕一時之倩影。范公有吾誰與歸之嘆。錢老有先亡其史之嗟。何哉。...
舉世竟無云惜于墜古。一人其有聿憂乎追新。宏約深美以為序兮。蔡公治業。中西古今皆會心矣。槐聚通經。乃知力學弗移。用固根本。博聞不棄。能歸海山。陋室侵淫。君子必慎其始也。中宵採擷。先生可由其統哉。源遠流長。無斷章以取義。天高地迥。有逞論而蒙嘲。文其如斯。史亦何異。耀九原以寸燭。鏗一葉而千秋。偶爾推窗。雨洗東坡之月。驀然回首。風翻暗浪之聲。 ...
問南朝之煙雨。馬帳空披。論西岸之干戈。龍門忝托。百年以樹亡根之木。一水而航失櫂之舟。醉啼笑於金風。雁思故岫。役死生以朝露。鮭識來津。嗚呼。師說虛傳。春秋誰續。誠心代有。異法何為。昔者讀誦之聲。不絕於耳。興亡之事。遂牢於心。明辨之功。必基於厚。篤行之志。莫急於隨。前賢後賢。悉學風以立本。身教言教。毋科技以爭新。童子何知。浮淺之談勿作。高山仰止。謙沖之度彌堅。冉冉清芬。不期立竿以見影。茫茫古道。庶免緣木而求魚。嗚呼。何今日一以反之哉。媚客之風。漸乎庠序。厚民之學。易以荒蕪。梗泛蓬飛。遍哀大夫之論晉。觚藏楮束。獨怪士子而聞周。日新則物佐為先。夕改則心思是尚。唐崇詩賦。遂襲八代之衰。明策時文。終患九流之竭。場屋有加於後至。英華豈出於偏成。積水增冰。疏而知其因果。浮雲白日。比以別其賢奸。鐘磬悠揚。寧片花而鑑往。關河冷落。且杯酒以祝來。聽殘雨之籠晴。滅孤燈以破曉。豈知鳳回南國。已非晉代衣冠。夢入西風。猶是漢家陵闕。