-
BULLETIN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CHINESE LITERATURE NATIONAL CHENGCHI UNIVERSITY NO.29
Publication date： 2018-06
Special Article Literary Mind and Way of Yi
Wenxin Diaolong is a masterpiece of literary criticism in ancient China. “Wenxin,” or the exertion of the mind in writing, is the core of literature, according to the author Liu Hsieh (courtesy name Yen-ho). Liu also believes that the Way of Yi as in Yijing, or “taiji,” is the origin of literature. “Taiji” comes from Yijing, and represents the perfect harmony between “yin” and “yang,” or the “supreme ultimate” state of endless cycles of lives in nature. As such, “taiji” is the origin of creativity in humanities. This article aims to examine how Liu brings together the literary mind and the Way of Yi, and how he illustrates the creative function of the literary mind. Based on relevant research, this article concludes that, on one hand, the literary mind achieves emptiness and tranquility, and consequently determines the approach through imagination (“shensi”) ; on the other hand, it cultivates awareness, and consequently determines the structure through flexible adaptability to varying situations (“tongbian”). “Shensi” and “tongbian,” are therefore the two aspects of “Wenxin,” its key to the manifestation of the Way and its creative function lie herein. The key to the craft of literature (“Diaolong” or “Carving of Dragons”) is the manifestation of the literary mind, this is of the uttermost importance in Liu’s masterpiece.
Today we tend to apply the label of “Former Seven Masters” to the literati community that initiated the literary archaist movement in the mid-Ming period. Members of the “Former Seven Masters” were all northerners except for Xu Zhenqing. Some scholars have thus argued that when the Former Seven Masters promoted literary archaism, they were in fact trying to raise the status of northern literature at the expense of its southern counterpart. By zooming in on the leader of this community, this paper attempts to show that regional disparity is indeed an important perspective for understanding the cultural development in the Ming dynasty, but the interactions and competitions between the different regions were complex and deserve closer attention. When we adopt the method of regional analysis for studying Ming literature, we should avoid falling into the trap of geographic determinism and arriving at a conclusion based solely on the regional identities of the historical figures whom we study.
Theme Thesis Between Ming Neo-classicism and Jingling School: A Preliminary Study of Tang Ruxun’s Huibian tangshi shiji
Ming poetry had been dominated by Neo-classicism until the Jingling School took over in the later stage of the dynasty, marked by the publication of the anthology Shigui (A Return to Poetry) by the leaders of the school Zhong Xing and Tan Yuanchun. Facing the juxtaposition of two currents of poetics, blind poet Tang Ruxun (1565-1659) compiled firstly the anthology Tangshi jie (Explications of Tang Poetry) and then Huibian tangshi shiji (An Assorted Anthology of Tang Poetry in Ten Volumes). The former work pays tribute to two Neo-classical canons, Tangshi zhengsheng (The Orthodox Voices of Tang Poetry) by Gao Bing and Tangshi xuan (Selection of Tang Poetry) by Li Panlong, and offers an explanation of poetics that invites readers into the world of the art. The latter, on the contrary, confronts the thoughts of Jingling School by exhibiting a kaleidoscopic picture of Tang poetry in diverse styles and perspectives. The structure of this latter work accommodates disparate theories of poetics and enables conversations among them. The organizational structure of the anthology is in fact an outward projection of Tang Ruxun’s unique poetics. It embodies a ground-breaking discourse of poetics and an unprecedented form in the history of poetic anthologization in China.
Theme Thesis Pre-history of “Shenyun Theory”: Lu Shiyong’s Criticism of Du Fu and Great Tang Dynasty Poetry in His Shijing
Though claiming to model on the poetry in the Great Tang dynasty, the Revivalist School in the Ming dynasty in fact bestowes a disproportionate privilege upon Du Fu. In the anthology Shijing by Lu Shiyong in the late Ming dynasty, Du Fu’s poetry occupies the highest percentage – which seems fairly correspondent to the literary trend at that time. The book, however, at the same time stresses the significance of Li Bai and even Wang Wei, forming a critical framework in which the contributions of all the three great poets are equally valued. Such a framework strikes a great blow against the tradition of Revivalist poetics and, simultaneously, triggers a project on the reconstruction of the image of the Great Tang dynasty. This article investigates the image thus reconstructed through Lu Shiyong’s criticism of Du Fu’s poetry, and also attempts at interpreting the significance implied in this reconstruction. It begins with a discussion on Lu Shiyong’s double standard with which he carries out his criticism of Du Fu: on the one hand, he highly values Du’s poetry from the perspective of “Yi” and “Li;” on the other hand, he also criticizes Du Fu of violating the spirit of poetry in terms of “Qing” and “Yun.” In contrast to Du Fu, Li Bai as the leading poet of the Great Tang dynasty is highly skilled in evoking richer aesthetic fascination with a plain and concise idiom – what is called “Buzhi er zizhi zhimiao.” It is due to the same poetic idea that Lu Shiyong particularly elevates the position of Wang Wei in the history of classical poetry. Finally, this article brings up the concept of a “pre-history of Shenyun theory.” In doing so, it not only argues that Lu Shiyong in general may be categorized into a genealogy which prefigures Wang Shizhen’s “Shenyun theory” raised at the beginning of the Qing dynasty, but also manifests the complexity of the poetic discourse precedent to the formation of the theory.
This paper aims to explore images of Confucius, the academic trends and issues presented in two books, Lüshi Chunqiu (Spring and Autumn of Master Lü) and Huainanzi (Masters from Huainan). Even though the method of zajia is to assimilate ideas from other schools, and it is difficult to pin down any clear textual attitude regarding its presentation of Confucius, tendencies or preferences still can be found from the documents cited. For example, Lüshi Chunqiu purposely avoids the particular image of Confucius presented in Zhuangzi, but cites some of Confucius’ behaviors, from which we can see Lüshi Chunqiu seeks to fit in with the more conventional conception. On the other hand, Huainanzi, regarded as a Daoist document, adapts presentation of Confucius in Zhuangzi, the refashioned image of Confucius is thus endowed with historical significance. Secondly, Lüshi Chunqiu is concerned with the relationships between the King and his counselors, so it puts more emphasis on presenting how Confucius seeks to offer political solutions for the King and how a noble person could behaves himself even in difficult situations. On the contrary, Huainanzi, with the aim to celebrate the eclectic aesthetics of zajia which avoids limitation of a single perspective, conveys that even Confucius as a saint is unable to teach everything, but it is his various abilities (instead of one) that distinguishes him from other people including his disciples. The two books also explore the issue of learning and Confucius as a teacher from different perspectives. Lüshi Chunqiu emphasizes the advantage of learning by showing the cases of his renowned disciples, while Huainanzi points out the disadvantages of learning by showing the cases of his disciples’ death and illness. Finally, there are different usages of “Confucius” or “Zhongni” in these two books, which could be divided into three categories: 1) as a commentator in line with his conventional image; 2) when having teachings other than Confucianism put into his mouth; 3) when celebrating ideas of Laozi, by presenting Confucius’ words as supporting texts of Laozi. Lüshi Chunqiu adopts the first two usages, while Huainanzi adopts all of them. The presented images of Confucius in both of the two books reflect tendency to see Confucius as a great model during Pre-Qin and Early Han Period.
This article, at first, reviews the tone scheme theories of seven-character poems in Ming and Ching Dynasties and then investigates the tone patterns of more than one thousand poems by Tang poets. The tone pattern of seven-character poems by Tang poets can be divided into two types: the so-called multiple rhyme-word seven-character poems, and one rhyme-word seven-character poems. The so-called multiple rhyme-word seven-character poems follow the regulation whose tone scheme is very similar to that of regulated poems, and the tone scheme of the one rhyme-word seven-character poems is, on the other hand, very similar to that of the old style poems. Lastly, this paper finds that the Tang poets may not strictly abide by the fore-mentioned regulation. Where there is a leeway in between, poets would write freely in terms of tone scheme.
The method of duplicate evidence advocated by Wang Guo Wei has a fundamental influence on the modern research of The Book of Songs and Documents of Antiquity in Taiwan. Inspired by Wang Guo Wei, Fu Si Nian’s aspects of historical materials and his research emphasis of The Book of Songs and Documents of Antiquity have also guided Qu Wan Li’s study of classics. This essay aims to examine this thread of thought which has not yet been discussed much. This essay first argues how Fu Si Nian’s historiography is influenced by Wang Guo Wei’s method of duplicate evidence, and how Wang and Fu’s aspects of historical materials are applied in Qu Wan Li’s research. It will also discuss the core emphasis of Fu’s study of The Book of Songs and Documents of Antiquity that influences Qu Wan Li’s research. To sum up, the purpose of this easy is to picture how the historical materials and the research thinking of The Book of Songs and Documents of Antiquity are passed down and developed from Wang Guo Wei to Qu Wan Li.
Prof. Xiong Gong Zhe devoted his whole life to education and traditional Chinese thoughts, especially Confucianism, and put much emphasis on the importance of practice. Even though Prof. Xiong had no published works especially focusing on Chun-Qiu, he discussed this subject in his works covering different aspects of Chun-Qiu and Three commentaries. He addressed propriety as the central thoughts of Chun-Qiu, practicing Confucianism as the aim of learning. He advocated that Confucius was more than a Confucian: “Confucius comprehensively inherited the cultures of Zhou dynasty and became a master of the ancient culture.” Confucius tried to straighten the corruption in society by editing Chun-Qiu— therefore the spirit of Chun-Qiu is to make study serve the practical purpose. That is why Prof. Xiong used to say “knowledge depends on practicing and conducting oneself in life.”
