I consider myself reasonably knowledgeable about the Cultural Revolution, but have always explored it as it pertains to China—the Four Olds, what Mao wanted, how he riled up an entire generation, where those young people are nowadays, how they feel about having humiliated and tortured their teachers, et cetera, et cetera… Hence, it came as a shock to learn that these ideals extended far beyond China’s borders. Which shouldn’t have really come as a surprise, given that the Chinese are Singapore’s biggest ethnic group.
Oh, and can we just take a moment to applaud dear old Chairman Mao for his unprecedented aptitude for catastrophically misnaming historical events and movements? The Cultural Revolution? Really? The Great Leap Forward? It was a great leap, all right, though I wouldn’t exactly call it forward.
I still distinctly remember sitting in my Uni amphitheatre for an American Lit lecture one day, when the professor said that the States’ counterculture movement was one of the biggest flops in its history. I distinctly remember how puzzled I was. Up until that point, I’d considered the hippie movement of the sixties and seventies one of the greatest things to have happened in recent history.
Unfortunately, he didn’t go into too much detail on this, but he did say the government took an entire generation’s youthful zeal and passion and redirected them so as to protect itself. Barring a few minor cosmetic changes, the establishment remained as it used to be, the people in power stayed in power, while the young people who’d fought for a new order were left traumatised, aimless and scraping a living doing menial jobs they were overqualified for.
The professor’s words stayed with me for years, forcing me to reassess the entire movement, to confront some uncomfortable questions that threatened to mar my idealised narrative. Questions like—what the hell does happen after a revolution’s over, successfully or otherwise? Where do revolutionaries go and what do they do? Does this new world they find themselves in reinforce or shatter their initial ideology?
That, in essence, is what Unrest is about. It’s about washed-up middle-aged people who once fought for quixotic ideals. It’s about the aftermath, once passions have simmered down and the fire of youth has been extinguished. It’s about reassessing those ideals, asking if they were justified, coming to terms with your role in the events that may or may not have been morally wrong.
The history of Singapore is long and beyond interesting. The period being discussed in the novel, the fifties and sixties, is particularly fascinating. There’s no time to go into detail, but suffice to say there were quite a few riots and demonstrations during this time.
Singapore was still reeling from the years of the Japanese occupation and was under the thumb of colonial Britain, its government cracking down hard on all communist activity. This sparked outrage among the Chinese populace, particularly students and working-class people, who idealised the CCP’s principles and wanted to create a socialist paradise reminiscent of the fatherland in Singapore.
In their youth, the protagonists were getting arrested and expelled from school for their subversive activities. Those same people are now living comfortably cocooned in the capitalist materialism of the nineteen-eighties, wondering what the hell it was all about and where their youth had gone. In an attempt to rediscover the purpose of those bygone days, they turn to empty marriages, work, adultery and other pursuits that end up taking them even further from who they are.
The novel allows us to observe the gap between expectations and reality. It treats us to a wonderfully delicious portrait of an idealist who comes to see the world for what it is for the first time, initially reluctant to admit there might be a discrepancy there.
There’s a world of difference between championing certain tenets and living them out for yourself. When the anguish and the suffering looming on the horizon drive paralysing fear into your bones, it’s no longer so easy to stick to the beliefs you used to espouse. When faced with actual lack, these armchair philosophers are forced to quickly course correct, scrambling for excuses as to why their plans changed.
Unrest is about the human spirit in retreat. It is also about acute loneliness and the inherent difficulty of connecting in a world that’s become too broad. It’s about the inability to read others and, more alarmingly, the inability to accurately read ourselves. The loyal husband, the steadfast wife, the soldier of the fatherland… Unrest exposes just how hollow the words we use to describe ourselves really are.
If I had to describe the writing style, I’d call it experimental. The prose jumps from past to present, alternating between the first- and third-person voice. There are quite a few meta elements, with the author discussing the novel’s progress and even conversing with the characters. While highly captivating, the prose can also be confusing. There were times when I wasn’t sure which timeline I was in, which character I was following, who’s who, etc.
All that aside, I think Unrest is a gem of a book that deftly explores the themes of loneliness, aging, nationalism and love. It concerns itself with young characters, but has the audacity to follow them into their fifties, to sift through the preceding three decades and explore the circumstances that shaped them. It’s quotable af, the language highly sensuous and poetic. In short, a warm recommendation.