From Perspective to Ideology: A Study of the Influence of Chinese Wisdom on Pearl S. Buck’s Transnational Feminist Consciousness

1 Introduction

The American Nobel laureate Pearl S. Buck dedicated her life to the cause of women’s liberation. Her first novel, East Wind: West Wind (1926), marked the beginning of a new era of Chinese women expressing their own voices. From that point on, Buck used the issue of women as a critical entry point for her engagement with the world. Not only did she create a variety of female characters in her works, but she also published essays on women’s liberation. Her articles on the liberation of American white middle-class women, published in 1938, 1939, and 1941 respectively, represent significant contributions to this discourse. Given her multiple identities as a Nobel laureate, bestselling author, and expert on Asian issues, these publications immediately attracted wide attention. Some women’s organization, such as the National Woman’s Party (NWP), welcomed them with enthusiasm, hoping to leverage her celebrity status to revitalize the long-dormant women’s liberation movement.

Although Buck denied being a feminist herself (Buck 1938a, 227), her reflections on women’s liberation nonetheless sparked scholarly interest in her feminist consciousness. Her cultural biographer Peter Conn attributed this to her exposure to gender equality during her university education in the United States. In Pearl S. Buck: A Cultural Biography (1996), Conn provides detailed accounts of the educational goals and curriculum of Randolph-Macon Woman’s College where Buck spent 4 years’ time, noting that Buck’s education was deeply influenced by gender equality principles of the school. The school emphasized instilling “civic responsibility” (Conn 1996, 51) in its students, encouraging them to seek value beyond traditional domestic roles. Conn argued that Buck’s extraordinary achievements in writing and social activities were grounded in this foundation of gender egalitarianism.

Chinese scholars have similarly tended to attribute Buck’s feminist consciousness to Western influences. Researchers such as Zhu Hua, in discussing Buck’s feminist awareness, emphasize the impact of Randolph-Macon Woman’s College on her thought (Zhu 2019, 81), while rarely acknowledging the role of Chinese wisdom in her feminist ideology. Although both Chinese and foreign scholars recognize the profound influence of her Chinese experiences and classical Chinese philosophy, they often treat her feminist thought as an exception, considering it purely a product of Western ideology. This phenomenon may be related to Buck’s ambivalent attitude toward Confucianism, the most quintessential of Chinese philosophies. While she highly praised Confucianism, referring to it as her “frame of reference” that “shames her thinking, conduct and even character” (Buck 1972, 59), she didn’t hesitate to critique Confucius’s low opinion on women, condemning his tendency to “subjection and inferiority of women” (Buck 1972, 60). She used her personal experience to illustrate that, upon receiving the Nobel Prize in 1938, she experienced a sense of guilt toward male writers and critics, attributing this to her early Confucian education, which discouraged women from surpassing men in excellence. Buck’s criticism created a perceived distance between her feminist thought and Confucian teachings. Additionally, Confucius well-known remark, “Of all people, girls and servants are the most difficult to behave to” has long been ingrained in popular consciousness, marking his views on women as a prominent aspect of his philosophy. Thus, the paradox emerges: the more Buck emphasized the influence of Confucianism on her, the more the Chinese elements in her feminist thoughts seemed to fade.

It is widely acknowledged that Buck followed her missionary parents to China when she was just three months old and lived there until she was 42. Her extensive time in China provided her with immense resources for her future writing and social activism. Therefore, it is inconceivable that her feminist consciousness could have developed independently of her Chinese experience. In fact, even when discussing the liberation of American white women, she remained rooted in a Chinese perspective. More importantly, after 1942, Buck’s feminist thought continued to evolve. She no longer focused solely on the liberation of American white middle-class women but extended her attention to the liberation of women of color and Asian women. She placed gender issues within a broader framework of racial and national liberation, highlighting the transracial and transnational characteristics of her feminist ideology. Furthermore, her vision transcended the goals of the feminist movement in the United States at the time, far exceeding the gender equality concepts she encountered during her college education in America. Therefore, Western sources alone cannot fully account for the driving forces behind her feminist thought. The Chinese experience and the wisdom she drew from Chinese philosophy were key in guiding her beyond the limitations of Western-centric perspectives and toward addressing humanity’s common challenges with a broader vision.

Based on this, this article examines Buck’s feminist ideology as presented in her works and speeches, aiming to uncover the influence of Chinese classical culture on the formation of her thought. The paper argues that Buck’s feminist ideology integrates concepts such as the “bifocal perspective”, “seeking common ground while reserving differences” and “holistic thinking” highlighting the profound impact of Chinese wisdom on her feminist consciousness.

2 “Bifocal Perspective” and the Chinese Model of American Women’s Liberation

Buck was born in 1892 and came to China as an infant, spending her childhood, adolescence, and most of her young adulthood there, not returning to the United States until 1934. Except for her university years and a few brief interruptions, she lived predominantly in China. Wang Amah, Buck’s Chinese nurse, was the most influential woman in her life besides her mother, Carie. Wang taught Buck to speak Chinese, introduced her to Chinese folk tales and history, and gave her first exposure to literature. Wang also frequently took her on walks through the streets, listening to storytellers, which planted early seeds of heroism and justice in Buck’s mind. These authentic Chinese stories not only enabled her to quickly grasp Chinese, even before her mother tongue, but also helped shape her initial emotional and cognitive understanding of Chinese people, through which she grasped their characters, behaviors, and emotional expressions. Over time, she absorbed much of the Chinese behavioral and cognitive logic, leading to a deep emotional bond with China, which she referred to as her “fatherland”. To the young Buck, America as her birthplace was abstract and distant, while China was tangible and immediate.

While Buck’s engagement with Chinese people gave her a Chinese perspective, her mother Carie constantly reminded her that she was an American. Carie had come to China to spread American civilization and values, with missionary work as her primary responsibility. As a mother, she also bore the duty of raising her children to be qualified American citizens. Carie emphasized the importance of instilling American values in children. She celebrated American national holidays, such as the Fourth of July by displaying the Stars and Stripes at home to install a sense of patriotism. She also established a comfortable American-style home, often planting a garden with seeds ordered from the United States. These American gardens served as bastions of American ideals and culture, radiating American thought outward. Additionally, Carie devoted herself to educating her children according to the American educational system, exposing them to Western classical works from a young age. Buck later admitted that she began reading Western classics at the age of seven, with Dickens guiding her on her literary path. She even wrote a dedicated article thanking Dickens for imparting moral values, teaching her to “love all sorts of people, high and low, rich and poor, the old and little children” and to avoid “hypocrisy and pious mouthing of unctuous words” (Buck 1936, 11).

It was the collision and interaction between these dual languages and cultures that shaped Buck’s unique value system. It is difficult to determine which influence was more significant, even in 24 years after she returned to the United States, she made a claim that “I am loyal to Asia as I am loyal to my own land” (Buck 1954, 262). However, it is clear that her experiences in these two worlds granted her a singular “bifocal perspective”. One focus stemmed from the perspective of the American Presbyterian community to which her parents belonged, and the other from the Chinese society she knew intimately from childhood. Buck described these two perspectives as representing two entirely different worlds, separated by a wall that prevented communication. As a child, she sought to open a door in that wall, enabling her to freely move between the two worlds, learning to act according to the rules of each.

This bifocal perspective not only equipped Buck with the ability to bridge two divides, but more importantly, it allowed her to transcend the limitations of a singular viewpoint, enhancing her capacity for critique, analysis, and reflection. This capability became even more prominent upon her return to the United States, as her bifocal perspective broadened her wisdom and critical insight, enabling her to surpass her contemporaries. Regarding American women’s emancipation, this bifocal perspective allowed her to move beyond the confines of the American context, seeking inspiration from her Chinese counterparts.

Buck’s close contact with Chinese women occurred during her agricultural research expedition to the Suzhou City of Anhui Province, where she assisted her husband, John Lossing Buck (1890–1975). This investigation was pivotal for both of their later achievements, laying the foundation for their respective contributions to their fields. A critical element of this experience was their discovery of the value and contributions of China’s rural women within both family and society. This expedition allowed Buck to closely observe and analyze their speeches, behaviors, mental states, and moral structures, helping her realize that previous Western depictions of Chinese upper-class women were disconnected from reality. She believed that lower-class rural women truly represented the majority of Chinese women. Both she and her husband worked to revalidate these women’s worth – he through scientific research, using data to affirm their contributions, and she through literary creation that employed vivid characters to convey their strength.

After the Suzhou investigation, Buck published an article titled Chinese Women: Their Predicament in the China of Today, where she presented her unique feminist views. In the article, she argued that due to harsher living conditions than men, Chinese women developed qualities of resilience and courage, while men, having been pampered, lacked such strength. As a result, men were often inferior to women in terms of character (Buck 1931, 905). In this bold reversal of traditional gender hierarchies, Buck placed women in a morally superior position, asserting that in times of hardship, women were more trustworthy than men.

The contrast between Chinese women and men is illustrated in her novels of the early 1930s, where Buck predominantly utilized a female savior model, reflecting this newly developed perspectives on gender relations. The female protagonists in The Good Earth (1931) and The Mother (1934), O-Lan and the titular “Mother” are ordinary rural women who are entrusted with significant responsibilities by Buck. O-Lan, for instance, rises to the occasion during a severe famine, resolutely opposing the mortgaging of land to preserve future prosperity. She also swiftly retrieves valuables during a raid, securing wealth for Wang Lung’s success. In comparison, Wang Lung shows indecision in times of crisis, lacking the rationality and decisiveness that O-Lan embodies, with her overshadowing his achievements. The “Mother” is even more central to her narrative. Abandoned by her lazy husband, she bears the full burden of raising children and caring for elderly parents. She remains steadfast, like a strong pine tree, preserving the family amidst adversity. In these traditional Chinese women, Buck discovered a deep-rooted strength, firmly believing that only through such endurance could women achieve liberation.

Upon returning to the United States in 1934, Buck observed disappointedly that despite the better education American women received, they had not made greater strides toward liberation compared with Chinese counterparts. In 1938, 1939, and 1941, she published articles and essays focusing on the liberation of American middle-class white women, aiming to raise public awareness. In American Medieval Women (1938), she condemned traditional gender norms of American society that confined women to domestic roles. In America’s Gunpowder Women (1939), she criticized white middle-class American women, arguing that the notion that “American women enjoy the most special privileges in the world” (Buck 1939, 127) was a complete fallacy. She used the historical example of the Manchus, who, having become too accustomed to luxury and comfort, lost their fighting spirit and were eventually overthrown, to warn that “privileges” are a double-edged sword, fostering complacency among women and ultimately hindering their pursuit of liberation.

An analysis of Buck’s logic reveals a pattern consistent with her earlier essay on Chinese women. In her discussion of the moral differences between Chinese men and women, Buck attributed these differences to the disparate conditions they faced, highlighting how the “privileges” enjoyed by men contributed to their moral inferiority. Similarly, in her view, American women, like Chinese men, reveled in their privileges, unaware that these privileges limited their opportunities. She thus concluded that American women, like Chinese men, were morally inferior to Chinese women, as they had not strived to overcome their circumstances. Buck criticized American women for expressing discontent without taking action, arguing that this approach was futile for self-liberation.

By this point, Buck had proposed that American women should take Chinese women as role models, boldly stepping out of their homes into broader spheres of activity. She believed that American women were fully capable of becoming “lawyers, doctors, artists, scientists, engineers, or any other profession” (Buck 1939,128). In 1941, she published Of Men and Women, using the achievements of Chinese women, such as the establishment of women’s banks, to contrast with the career limitations of American women. Through this, she aimed to inspire American women to seek value and accomplishment beyond the domestic sphere.

Her first American-themed, American-charactered novel upon returning, This Proud Heart, reflected these ideas. The protagonist, Susan, faced a choice between family and career. After much contemplation, she rejected the dichotomy between domestic and professional life, asserting that “work is a sort of heaven, where there is neither male nor female” (Buck 1938b, 345). From Buck’s perspective, women could be both mothers, wives, and professionals, as Susan’s decision illustrated the answer she offered to white middle-class American women.

It is evident that Buck did not challenge the gendered division of labor within the household. Her feminist consciousness bore similarities to that of 18th-century feminist pioneer Mary Wollstonecraft, who also did not reject the maternal role but sought within it a foundation for women’s liberation. In A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Wollstonecraft argues that women’s liberation stems from their God-given reason, enabling them to be faithful partners with high virtues for their husbands and mothers equipped to raise capable future citizens for both family and nation (Wollstonecraft 1794, vii-xiii). Similarly, Buck emphasized that a woman who had realized her self-worth would be a more emotionally stable mother, fostering healthy development in her children. That said, Buck viewed the gunpowder women as incapable of fulfilling the responsibilities of wives and mothers, only becoming “a nag to her husband and children, and a gossip among her women friends” (Buck 1938a, 227).

At this stage, Buck limited her focus to the liberation of white middle-class women, neglecting women of other races and classes, a limitation for which she was criticized by other feminist groups. However, her encouragement of American women to challenge gender restrictions and pursue greater social value was still significant. In this process, Buck utilized her “bifocal perspective,” stepping beyond the narrow vision of white women and hoping to inspire American women by presenting Chinese women as exemplars. To Buck, while external factors undoubtedly played a role in women’s liberation, women’s internal strength could not be overlooked.

3 “Seeking Common Ground While Reserving Differences” and the Liberation of Colored Women

With the United States’ entry into World War II, Buck’s feminist ideology underwent a significant shift. She no longer confined her focus to white middle-class women, and her concerns extended beyond merely women’s issues. The primary reason for this transformation was her realization, upon returning to the U.S., that racial problems in America were more severe than gender issues: “The whole country is divided in two parts and the two parts were living as though there were two separate nations, except that they had the same government” (Buck 1942a, 22). The outbreak of World War II further exacerbated the racial problem. On the one hand, the state required a large workforce to fill the void left by the war. People of color were eager to participate in the anti-fascist war, hoping to improve their situation amidst racial discrimination. On the other hand, discrimination against people of color persisted in various spheres, including defense industries, the military, and everyday life. Racial radicalism grew, and conflicts escalated, culminating in riots in Harlem and Detroit in 1943.

Faced with rising racial tensions, Buck unequivocally sided with people of color. She joined the American Civil Liberties Union and, in 1942, founded the National Committee Against Racial Discrimination (CARD), serving as its chairperson. This organization advocated for equal employment opportunities for Black Americans and aimed to eliminate racial segregation in the military. In addition, she utilized her public status to denounce racial discrimination and promote racial equality. In 1942, she delivered many speeches and published essays on racial issues, later compiled into works such as American Unity and Asia and What America Means to Me. Among her most notable works were the speech “Breaking Down Racial Prejudice” at Harvard University’s commencement ceremony and the article “Letter to Colored Americans.”

In her speeches, Buck drew upon the logic she used to deconstruct male superiority to challenge the ideology of white racial superiority. She argued that Black Americans possessed qualities that whites lacked, attributing this to their unfortunate circumstances. She reasoned that “people who have suffered, people who have had to live with an inescapable trouble develop a corroding bitterness or a deep wide philosophical outlook on life” (Buck 1942b, 450). According to Buck, most Black Americans did not harbor resentment but instead met their circumstances with humor and inherent wisdom. She concluded that “more maturity of spirit among the colored people in this country than among any others” (Buck 1942b, 451). Buck employed the same logic she used to argue that Chinese women, shaped by adversity, were superior to men. In a similar way, the injustices faced by Black Americans had, in her view, made them stronger. Thus, Buck overturned the notion of white superiority, asserting: “colored people have now the advantage over the white man” (Buck 1942b, 451).

Buck’s ability to transcend the limitations of her white identity was closely linked to her experiences in China. As the white minority, she and her family were caught up in the 1927 “Nanjing Incident” and barely survived thanks to the courageous assistance of Chinese friends. Peter Conn noted, “Buck’s early years as a member of a minority group did much to shape her later commitment to racial equality and cultural pluralism” (Conn 1996, 24). She believed that “the character has nothing to do with race” (Buck 1942b, 450). For Buck, inner qualities mattered far more than skin color. She openly stated that she did not care which race ruled a nation; if she had to choose between a kind leader of color and a cruel white leader, she would unhesitatingly choose the former. What mattered to her was who could bring equality and freedom. By severing the link between race, ability, and morality, Buck dismantled the foundation of racial superiority.

Although Buck did not join any specific organizations for Black women’s rights, her feminist thought began to incorporate racial perspectives as she became more involved in the civil rights movement. Prior to the second wave of feminism, women’s organizations were largely “homogenous” (Rupp &Taylor 1987, 135). For example, the National Woman’s Party, of which Buck was a member, primarily served the interests of upper-middle-class white women. People of color had long been excluded from mainstream feminist movements, and even into the 1950s, feminist organizations were hostile to the interests of people of color, ignoring their struggles. For instance, during the suffrage movement of the 1920s, Black women were excluded from political suffrage. In the 1940s, Black women’s primary concerns, such as segregation, lynching, and discrimination, were also neglected by feminist organizations. Buck condemned women’s organizations for ignoring social issues and focusing solely on their gender-based interests. In her speeches to the National Woman’s Party, she criticized their indifference to racial problems. Unlike the widespread racial segregation attitudes within the Woman’s Party, Buck emphasized the potential for integration between gender and racial equality. She believed women and people of color are the two minority groups and as long as this twofold discrimination goes on, “neither we nor the other country will achieve true democracy” (Buck 1941a, A126). In this context, the minority group Buck referred to naturally included Black women. She argued that the two groups shared similar circumstances and that feminist organizations should support the fight for racial equality while promoting gender equality.

Buck’s perspective of “seeking common ground while reserving differences” in addressing race and gender issues reflects her flexible application of Confucian wisdom. Buck was deeply influenced by Confucian thought. Early in her life, she had studied the Chinese classics with her teacher Mr. Kong. Over a decade, Kong not only taught her to read and write Chinese but also introduced her to Confucian thought, which became a crucial component of Buck’s intellectual framework and worldview. The Confucian idea of “within the four seas, all men are brothers” particularly resonated with Buck. This concept, originating from The Analects of Confucius, advocates transcending narrow bloodlines and regional boundaries and treating all people as siblings. Buck was profoundly inspired by this notion and frequently applied it in her writings. In 1925, she cited it in the epigraph of her master’s thesis China and the West to emphasize its influence on her. When she translated Nai’an Shi’s Shui Hu Chuan from 1929 to 1933, she opted to title it “All Men Are Brothers” instead of “Water Margin”, believing that the literal translation would not convey the novel’s core message to Western readers. She sought to highlight the brotherhood among the Liangshan heroes. The idea of “within the four seas, all men are brothers” emphasizes equality, friendship, and mutual assistance, which align with Buck’s belief in transcending racial boundaries to achieve racial equality. If blood and regional boundaries can be surpassed, she reasoned, why not racial ones? Buck recognized the potential to unite different forces through this principle. She argued that as long as both parties shared common interests, cooperation and mutual benefit could be realized.

Buck’s proposal for an alliance between women and people of color exemplified this idea, but it undoubtedly exceeded the ideological framework of most women’s organizations typically represented by NWP at the time (Christ 2019, 201). These organizations remained narrowly focused on gender equality, avoiding racial issues and even enforcing racial segregation within their ranks. Buck exposed the racial discrimination present among women, criticizing the narrow-mindedness and prejudice of white middle-class women. This theme was evident in her post-war novel The Angry Wife. Set in the American South after the Civil War, the novel explores how a white family struggles to accept the independence of formerly enslaved Black people and the prospect of interracial marriage. The protagonist, Lucinda, is furious about Black emancipation, unable to accept that former slaves now earn wages as servants, and even more outraged by the possibility of a marriage between the Black woman Bettina and her brother-in-law, Tom, which would place Bettina on an equal footing with her. Lucinda’s hostility towards Bettina leads her to order her husband, Pierce, to drive Bettina away. Although slavery had ended, racial discrimination remained deeply ingrained in Southern society. Both Tom and Pierce acknowledge that “there was no victory and no peace because the hearts of men and women had not changed” (Buck 1947, 123).

However, not everyone’s thinking remained stagnant. The men, particularly Tom, were less resistant to change. Tom, who falls in love with Bettina, fathered three children with her. Although their relationship had not yet gained social acceptance, Tom was determined to break through the racial barriers. After arguing with Pierce, Tom resolutely left his hometown with Bettina and their children, vowing to make their own world “where everybody will be treated justly for what he is” (Buck 1947, 130). Buck’s vision of interracial marriage as a means to achieve racial integration was highly forward-thinking, as the legalization of interracial marriage did not occur until 1967. She illustrated the promise of racial integration through the harmonious life of Tom and Bettina and the successful futures of their children, who grew up to lead fulfilling lives.

Apart from Tom, even Pierce, who had previously demanded Bettina’s departure, does not oppose Tom’s interracial marriage. His actions are entirely driven by pressure from his wife, Lucinda. In The Angry Wife, Buck focuses primarily on Lucinda, a white woman, portraying her as more intolerant of racial equality than the male characters. Tom, as the most rebellious figure in the novel, condemns Lucinda’s racial prejudice, questioning her “[w]hat else do you care so much, you white women?” (Buck 1947, 126), and declaring “you’re afraid of losing your men and you keep the other women down under your feet” (Buck 1947, 126). Tom further exposes the depth of Lucinda’s prejudice, stating, “as long as there is woman like you, there will be no justice on the earth. You will keep your foot on the neck of any woman who threatens your sacred position in the home” (Buck 1947, 126). Through the character of Lucinda, Buck aims to critique the racial discrimination present within the ranks of women. White women, in Buck’s portrayal, exhibit no sense of “sisterhood” towards women of color. They fail to recognize the unique situations of women of color, oppressed by both race and gender, and are unwilling to form alliances with them. Instead, they seek to distance themselves, thereby affirming their racial superiority.

Although Buck does not emphasize gender inequality within communities of color, and often treats these communities as a unified whole, even when addressing Black women, she approaches their oppression primarily from a racial rather than a gendered perspective. Nonetheless, Buck recognizes the divergent demands within the broader category of women. Her critique of the racial oppression faced by Black women within the female community distinguishes her from her contemporaries in feminist thought. Regarding the liberation of Black women, Buck endeavors to unite marginalized groups, including women, in a pursuit of freedom and equality that respects their differences. In her view, this constitutes the fundamental guarantee a democratic nation like the United States should provide, reflecting the central theme of her philosophy of “seeking common ground while preserving differences.”

4 “Holistic View” and the Goal of Global Women’s Liberation

After returning to the United States, Buck attempted to shift her focus domestically, engaging with issues such as the American women’s liberation movement and the struggles for equal rights by people of color. Moreover, she published five novels under the pen name John Sedges, all set in the U.S., in an effort to dispel the stereotype that she could only write about Asia and China. Nevertheless, Buck never completely shifted her attention away from Asia, especially following the outbreak of World War II, as she remained closely attuned to developments in the region and expressed deep sympathy for the plight of Asian people. Buck leveraged her influence to urge U.S. government to support China’s resistance against Japan and organized civilian efforts to raise substantial war supplies for China. Additionally, through unofficial channels, such as founding the East and West Association and editing Asia magazine, she worked to foster communication and understanding between Asia and the U.S., contributing to the promotion of peace between the two regions.

Buck’s close connection with Asia led her to continue focusing on the conditions of Asian women. While Buck’s choice to depict Chinese women in the 1920s and 1930s may have been circumstantial, by the 1940s, her continued portrayal of Asian – particularly Chinese – women became a deliberate decision. As the war progressed, especially with the opening of the Asian theater, American interest in Asia – especially China – intensified. Buck’s expertise on China gained renewed importance, and she earned the title of an “expert on Asia” (Conn 1996, 185) with even President Franklin D. Roosevelt and First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt seeking her counsel on related matters. Thus, the outbreak of World War II and America’s heightened focus on Asia propelled Buck’s return to writing about her familiar subject of Asian women.

Beyond these factors, Buck also continually reflected on the role women should play during wartime and their liberation in the postwar era. In her 1942 speech titled “Women and Victory” delivered at the American Association of University Women, she speculated on how American women would confront the new challenges of the postwar era. She believed that the war would lead to the loss of many American men, bringing both challenges and opportunities for women. However, Buck harbored doubts about the capacity of American women to rise to these challenges, remarking that “they shrink from competition and struggle in the world of human work… think of marriage as security for themselves” (Buck 1942c, 111). In her 1949 co-authored work American Argument with Eslanda Goode Robeson, Buck examined why American women, despite their privileges, continued to face gender inequality in employment and politics, attributing this to the fact that “American women are spoiled and unwilling to shoulder the corresponding responsibilities” (Buck 1949, 11), characterizing them as docile and somewhat lazy. Buck then noted that “they complain a good deal of many things but they don’t do anything about them” (Buck 1949, 59). From this, it is evident that Buck’s perception of American women had not evolved beyond her prewar views, and she remained pessimistic about their postwar liberation.

In contrast, Buck was filled with optimism regarding Asian women. Her novels vividly portray the growth of Asian – particularly Chinese – women during wartime. While her depictions of Chinese women in the 1930s emphasized their endurance, her postwar works showcased a broader range of admirable qualities, with wisdom and courage becoming the defining traits of her female characters during this period. For instance, in her 1941 bestseller Dragon Seed, written in support of China’s resistance against Japan, Buck highly praised two types of women. The first type, exemplified by Mrs. Lin, represented traditional women who, in the face of the Japanese military’s atrocities, remained resolute and sought to protect their homes alongside their husbands. These women, though distant from modern feminist thought, demonstrated remarkable courage and wisdom during times of adversity. Buck recognized their strength and held high expectations for them. The second type, represented by Jade, embodied the new woman, who had received some education and was open to new ideas. After the war broke out, these women stood alongside men in battle, displaying the valor of “women [who] are equally capable as men.” Furthermore, they rejected traditional gender roles, refusing to focus on pleasing men but instead prioritizing self-improvement, as seen in Jade, who sold her long hair to pursue her education. These women also sought roles beyond marriage and aspired to contribute more significantly during wartime, embodying Buck’s ideal of the modern woman.

It is important to note, however, that after Buck’s return to the U.S. in 1934, she never visited China again, and her novel Dragon Seed was based on reports she had gathered about China. Her depiction of Chinese women is strongly subjective, combining her prior understanding of them with her aspirations for the ultimate liberation of American women (Shaffer 2016, 15). Buck projected onto Chinese women the qualities she found lacking in American women, crafting Jade’s almost-perfect image as a model for what wartime women should be. Buck’s intentional elevation of Chinese women, while deprecating Western women, stood in stark contrast to the hegemonic attitude the U.S. held towards China at the time. Historically, Asia, as a former colony of the West, had been viewed through an orientalist lens – either as mysterious or as a symbol of backwardness and moral decay, detached from progress and civilization. Buck, however, took the opposite stance, using self-criticism of American women’s inability to enjoy the equality supposedly upheld by American society as an opportunity to critique the hypocrisy of American democracy and challenge its hegemonic status, demonstrating a perspective rooted in critical internationalism.

Buck’s ability to transcend the limitations of Western centrism is closely tied to her transnational life and educational experiences, as she often turned to Chinese thought for inspiration. In her 1942 speech “Chinese and Indian Thought,” Buck praised the progressiveness and wisdom of Confucianism. She pointed out that as early as 500 years before Christ, Confucius had articulated the responsibilities individuals owed to their families, their nations, and the world, and had envisioned a world in which “the elderly would be cared for; the able-bodied would have work; the young would have opportunities for growth; and the widowed, orphaned, disabled, and sick would be provided for.” Influenced by Confucian ideals of a “universal harmony” Buck adopted a worldview that transcended national and ethnic boundaries, advocating for equality and mutual assistance among all peoples in the effort to build a shared future for humanity.

In Dragon Seed, even while the war was ongoing, Buck had already begun contemplating how to construct a harmonious global order. Through Jade’s voice, she proposed the idea that “there were only one moon and one sun for all” (Buck 1941b, 288), drawing together different nations and peoples into a shared destiny. In her 1948 novel Peony, through the protagonist Kung Chen, Buck critiqued the Judaic notion of a “chosen people,” asserting that “[n]one on earth can love those who declare that they alone are the sons of God ” (Buck 1948, 153), and that “God – if there is a God – would not choose one man above another or one people above another. Under Heaven we are all one family” (Buck 1948, 152). Buck opposed all forms of hegemony and viewed the world as an interconnected whole. In discussing why America should ally itself with Asia, she framed Asia as integral to world peace and development, her holistic worldview deeply influenced by both Confucianism and Daoism.

Buck applied this holistic vision of “universal harmony” to address women’s issues. She believed that the problems women faced were not isolated, and that women’s liberation was a common goal for women around the world, transcending national borders and requiring the collective wisdom of the global community to solve. She expanded the scope of women’s liberation by including women of color and Asian women in the movement. In addition to her focus on Chinese women, Buck also concerned herself with the struggles of women from other Asian countries. For instance, Come, My Beloved (1953) depicts Indian women grappling with the tension between tradition and modernity, as well as between individual and familial responsibilities, while The Living Reed (1963) portrays the lives, challenges, and inner worlds of Korean women during periods of turmoil. Buck advocated equal sharing of resources and mutual learning between nations, complementing each other’s strengths and differences in the joint pursuit of women’s liberation. She rejected the notion of the U.S. positioning itself as a role model or victor, and instead adopted a stance of critical internationalism, challenging America’s sense of superiority over Asia. Despite the seeming privileges of American women, Buck argued that favorable conditions did not necessarily foster their full potential. She called on American women to look to Asia for inspiration, to embrace new challenges, and to actively fight for their rights.

Buck viewed the world as a web of interrelated elements, with women’s issues as just one crucial node in a network that also encompassed race, ethnicity, and other factors. To focus solely on white Western women would, in her view, fail to achieve the broader goal of women’s liberation. Buck argued that the harmonious world she envisioned could only be achieved through cooperation and mutual understanding among different nations and ethnic groups. In addressing women’s issues, she emphasized the importance of considering the broader factors affecting their liberation. Her focus on racial issues during World War II and her later attention toward the situation in Asia, along with her efforts to foster collaboration between Asia and America, can be taken as her sustained interests in women’s issues. Buck’s philosophy that the world is interconnected, where every piece of the puzzle influences the whole, shows that she did not confine women’s issues to white American women or even to women in general. Instead, she placed them within the context of global concerns, demonstrating the dynamic and holistic nature of her thinking, which offers valuable insights for addressing the challenges of women’s liberation worldwide.

5 Conclusions

While Western women’s organizations still focused on the struggle for gender equality among white women, Buck had already begun to reveal the racial oppression within women’s organizations and recognized the unique strengths of Asian women, demonstrating the forward-thinking nature of her feminist ideology. This provides insight into why Buck’s feminist ideas were not fully embraced by Western feminist organizations. Despite her involvement with the American Women’s Party, she eventually parted ways with it. The primary reason for this divergence was that Buck’s feminist thought was continually evolving, with depth and breadth that surpassed the understanding of contemporary feminist organizations. Buck’s advanced perspective was largely attributable to her unique experiences living in both Eastern and Western cultures, as well as her assimilation and adaptation of Chinese philosophical insights. The wisdom she gleaned from Chinese thought endowed her with a capacity to transcend national, racial, and ethnic limitations, enabling her to approach the issue of women’s liberation with a broader perspective.

Buck integrated the issues of women’s liberation with those of racial and ethnic liberation, perceiving them as interconnected. In the 1940s, she recognized that both women and people of color were marginalized groups within society. She advocated for feminist organizations to support the civil rights movement for African Americans and to unite in the struggle for the freedoms and equal rights promised by American democracy. This forward-looking stance was eventually adopted by Western feminist organizations in the 1960s. Participation in the civil rights movement equipped women with experience and skills, laying the groundwork for the subsequent second wave of feminism. Additionally, Buck identified the presence of hegemonic ideologies in gender, racial, and ethnic issues. She argued that the superiority of men over women, of white people over people of color, and of the West over the East, was predicated on the oppression of one group by another. Buck emphasized that overcoming hegemonic ideologies was crucial for achieving democracy and freedom on a larger scale.

Buck’s early recognition of the plight of women in the Third World predates Western feminist awareness. It was not until 1984 that Chandra Talpade Mohanty, in her article “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses,” addressed the conditions faced by Third World women. In this article, Mohanty called attention to the diversity and complexity of their cultural and social contexts. In contrast, Buck had already been consciously focusing on Asian women in the 1930s and 1940s, revealing their contributions and sacrifices during wartime as equal to those of men. She even depicted women in roles of leadership traditionally occupied by men, as seen with characters like Jade and Mei-Li in Dragon Seed. However, it is also important to acknowledge that Buck’s portrayal of Asian women sometimes bordered on what could be termed “radical orientalism” (Wu 2013, 4). This was driven not only by her intention to stimulate American women’s focus on gender equality but also by her attempt to reverse the entrenched dichotomies between East and West. Buck sought to leverage Eastern wisdom to aid the West in overcoming its challenges and to advocate for greater cooperation and exchange between East and West. This approach reflects her contemplation of a postwar international order and highlights her absorption, adaptation, and flexible application of Chinese thought and wisdom.