Introduction
Whether from the perspective of the value of academic propositions or from the perspective of academic history, some fundamental issues in the study of ancient Chinese vernacular novels are more or less related to fierce controversies at the documentary level, and are concentrated in the study of famous works.
"Novel Old Smell"
However, the study of vernacular novel literature has never been systematically sorted out according to the perspective of "learning" - Lu Xun, Kong Yijing, Zhu Yixuan and other predecessors handled these contents more from the data level, often using "novel historical materials" [1] to order their titles, and the purpose of literature research "distinguishing chapter scholarship" was not fully invented; and some works that mentioned "novel literature" [2] still regarded it as a kind of "specialized philology", although there was a focus on argumentation and meticulous examination, but engaged in systematic construction research. In particular, the content of carefully judging the particularity of the vernacular novel literature is not much [3]. Macroscopically, this imposes a number of constraints on researchers of vernacular fiction:
First, due to the lack of general and theoretical works, the philological awareness of researchers of vernacular novels is relatively weak (which is relative to that of classical poetry researchers), which affects the depth of research on some specific issues.
Many of the controversies in the study of vernacular novels, although they discuss the issue of literature, do not adopt the argumentative logic that philology should have, and their conclusions are even very misleading--some issues that urgently need to carry out in-depth literature research have made philologists avoid it, which is itself an abnormal phenomenon.
Due to the lack of systematic philological judgment, some of these misleading arguments have even entered the history of literature[4] and even affected the general perception of the public[5], and their shortcomings urgently need to be reversed, and the existing research results need to be refined.
Second, vernacular fiction literature actually has both characteristics.
On the one hand, the study of vernacular novel literature should be regarded as a branch of "literary literature", such as the research methods of "general philology" such as catalogs, editions, and collations,[6] which are of course effective in the study and treatment of vernacular novels (but the foundation of this aspect of some practitioners is relatively weak, so the method is "special").
Historical Materials of Chinese Novels
On the other hand, the writing process, author research, version research and other issues of vernacular novel literature show many complexities and uniqueness, and cannot simply apply general literature research methods, but need to be adjusted and opened up according to the actual situation of existing literature. For the "uniqueness" side, although there are former sages and blue wisps, after all, the problems are complex and there are many clues, which still need to be summarized regularly.
Third, in this context, there is often a lack of common discussion basis among researchers of vernacular novel literature, so academic controversies can easily lead to the treatment of silk and yiyi - researchers of different novels often adopt different argumentation strategies and examination standards, and those who hold different academic opinions often confuse "research" with "hypothesis" and "guessing", and the research that can really systematically sort out the materials and balance the gains and losses of each family is still a minority, let alone a historical work that can understand these issues in general.
If we take Hu Shi's "Examination of the Dream of the Red Chamber" (1921) as the starting point for the study of vernacular novels in the modern sense, then the research in this field has gone through a century-long process. Regardless of the position of the evaluation, the modern academic system of "sorting out the national history" and "the examination of literary research"[7] is closely related to the study of vernacular novel literature, and it can be said that vernacular novel researchers have led a temporary trend of literature research.
Hu Shi's "Examination of the Dream of the Red Chamber"
However, even if we look back at the century-old academic history from the specific level of evidence science, we can still find many shortcomings that need to be solved urgently - due to some shortcomings in the fundamental method, the results of the evidence accumulated in the past are not all reliable. In the new academic environment, when it is necessary to reconstruct the foundation of vernacular novel research, further clarify the "universality" and "personality" of vernacular novel literature research.
This requires a systematic review of the logical starting point of the research field of "novel philology", trying to construct the norms of vernacular novel literature research, and avoiding the unnecessary controversy of those who "double the work with half the effort" in the past. If so, it may be possible to promote the systematic sorting and examination of the vernacular novel literature, and write a more precise history of the vernacular novel on this basis.
Due to space limitations, this article only reflects on some theoretical issues in the study of "authors" of vernacular novels - this is by no means the only important topic of controversy in vernacular novels, but this issue has considerable particularity (especially compared with the study of poetry authors), and is closely related to core issues such as the process of writing vernacular novels and the proofreading of editions.
When grasping the author's problem, it is necessary to have some understanding of many areas of vernacular novel literature. Therefore, this article calls it "the basic source problem of the study of vernacular novel philology".
1. What is an author?
Compared with poetry, which is often independently created by literati[8], the authors of ancient vernacular novels are often controversial, and most of them are academic public cases that are not easy to advance for a long time.
The first controversy is: what is an "author"? Do vernacular novels have "authors" to examine?
If a work is completed by one person from beginning to end, then its "author" status is of course indisputable. However, ancient vernacular novels, especially those that are "cumulative in generations", from the initial prototype to the complete writing, often pass through the hands of many people (including famous and unnamed candidates), the time span is also long, and the text evolution also has many "broken links", which is extremely difficult to study.
This requires first defining, in this case, is there a vernacular novel in the general sense of "author"? In what way should the "author" be determined? Researchers need to fully understand the complexity of authors of vernacular novels and try to find a signature style that can be applied to most works, so as to make the writing of novel history more theoretically deep and convincing.
Essays on the Study of Chinese Novel Historical Materials
In previous author examinations, or in the writing of novel history, it can be seen that researchers have not found a fixed standard for what constitutes an "author". Taking the general perception of several famous authors as an example, a cursory examination of the different labeling methods of contemporary collations shows that researchers have adopted different criteria for author identification.
First, mark the (possible) first draft finisher as the author.
For example, the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, no matter what version, basically calls Luo Guanzhong at the end of the Yuan and the beginning of the Ming Dynasty as the author. The People's Literature Publishing House's collated edition "restored the original appearance of Mao Ben as much as possible"[9] actually used the deletion of Mao Lun and Mao Zonggang's father and son as the text standard, but still adhered to the "Luo Guanzhong" annotation method, and did not mention the contribution of Mao's father and son at all in the cover signature. Similarly, some of the collated versions of "Water Margin" based on The Golden Batch will not consider Jin Shengsi's modification of the main text of "Water Margin" at the level of attribution.
Second, the final writer is labeled as the author.
For example, after forty times of "Dream of the Red Chamber", Cheng Weiyuan and Gao Hu have long been regarded as the authors of the sequels, and they have said that Cheng Weiyuan and Gao Hu talked about "trying their best to collect ... Over the years, there have only been more than 20 volumes accumulated, and more than ten volumes have been obtained on the drum in a day" and "gathered to read each original in detail and revise it without falsehood"[10], scholars often do not deepen their thinking and analysis, believing that since the last forty times are completed in the course and master, they will judge the two as the continuation of the last forty times.
Cheng Jiaben's "Dream of the Red Chamber" Cheng Weiyuan Sequence
Third, the perfection and writing of a typical "final version" is marked as the author.
For example, "Journey to the West" was preceded by the "Quanzhenhua" version of the late Yuan and early Ming Dynasties,[11] followed by the "Book of Sermons", but scholars generally believe that the author is Wu Cheng'en in the middle and late Ming Dynasty. Huang Yongnian and Huang Shoucheng's "Journey to the West Sermon Book" was directly signed "Journey to the West" in the "Four Masterpieces of Chinese Literature" published by Zhonghua Bookstore. Although the "Wu Cheng'en" is ambiguous, the preface states that "Wu Cheng'en's name was determined by scholars, but the evidence is not conclusive enough" [12]. As for whether it is possible to use the "author" of the Ming "Hundred Returns" and the title of the book to summarize the "Journey to the West Sermon Book" adapted in the early Qing Dynasty, it is not discussed.
Fourth, only the largest contributor is the author.
According to popular views, "so many and complex comments are recorded in the various fat books of "Dream of the Red Chamber", and as many as ten of these comments are signed, and at least five of them can be classified as lipid reviews." [13] However, if a comment is signed, it is generally only signed by lipogram, and few scholars pay attention to the comments on the existing lipogram at the signed level by many people. Although this is not a "novel author" in the strict sense, the way of thinking is common and can be used as a reference.
Fifth, try to label the contributors of each link as the author.
Relatively speaking, this way of attribution is less common. A more typical example is that since the Ming Dynasty of the Water Margin, there have been three theories: Shi Nai'an Zuo, Luo Guanzhong, and Shi Nai'an Luo Guanzhong. The preface to the "Human Text" is thought to be "mostly considered by the academic community to be Shi Nai'an's work"[15], but in the cover signature, it is written "Shi Nai'an, Luo Guanzhong", which may be out of the consideration of seeking perfection as much as possible. The latest "Dream of the Red Chamber" after forty times of "Anonymous Continuation" [16] is an attempt to include the "unsung heroes" who may contribute but have no documentary basis into the author's research horizon, and go further than the former.
People's Literature Publishing House Edition "Water Margin"
The above are relatively common ways for authors of vernacular novels to be labeled. In addition, if you subdivide it, of course, the situation is more complicated.
Under the existing literature conditions, it is still difficult for the "authors" of the above novels to draw conclusions, and various standards are facing both literature dilemmas and their own reasons. It is not intended here to judge the rights and wrongs of each point of view individually, but to raise the questions that are really worthy of our reflection:
If we look at the perspective of novel history and literature research, the root cause of the extreme confusion of the signature is obviously a series of questions - "what is the author" - in which/which key links can be contributed to be able to be called "author"? Does the "author" have to have some definite information, or can it be "anonymous"? If the contributors of one key link cannot be identified, can the contributors of other links be used instead when signing? After the name of "author" is established, can it be used to unify all circulating versions and obscure other "less important" collations and deletions?
Ancient Fiction Literature Series
These issues have hardly been faced in previous discussions, and macroscopic speculation is rare. To put it bluntly, this shows that a considerable number of researchers of novel literature have not considered the problem from the overall perspective of novel history, nor have they paid attention to some common ideas and methods of classical literature research, but only hope to give the novel a "name" of an author in order to facilitate general dissemination and citation.
As a result, the nomination "authors" of "Jin Ping Mei" have reached seventy or eighty, and the nominated "authors" of "Dream of the Red Chamber" are catching up with acceleration, and have exceeded twenty. The stories of the "author" and "Shi Nai'an" have also been compiled into a variety of novels, movies, and television.
We believe that we should first distinguish between the different levels of "author" research, on the basis of which we can continue to deepen our understanding and engage in academically meaningful discussions. The main points are as follows:
First, as a general literary knowledge of society, under normal circumstances, it is advisable to follow the previously recognized way of attribution, and regard the author's name as a conventional "symbol", rather than excessively entangled in philological controversies.
In a realistic context, introducing the complex controversy of fiction writers into the public domain can lead to unnecessary confusion. Taking early literature as an example, the background of the pre-Qin Zishu era and the process of writing the book are controversial, but when it is introduced to the public, it can be extracted from the "greatest common denominator" from Jane, and it can be considered to represent the views of a particular thinker, such as the "Tao Te Ching" represents the views of Lao Tzu (although who Lao Tzu is also controversial); Sima Qian's "Records of History" "Ten Records and No Books", there are many supplementary texts of Chu Shaosun and others in this book, but they can also be less involved in the general description, and there is no need to specifically sign it" Sima Qian, Chu Shaosun Continued".
From this point of view, the authors of novels marked by general publications may be suspected of being "arrow stacks", but they are not without documentary basis. In contrast, the "anonymous continuation" and similar statements of "Dream of the Red Chamber" are, at least for the time being, not suitable for rapid entry into the field of mass communication.
People's Literature Publishing House Collector's Edition "Dream of the Red Chamber"
Second, as a literary history, the vague concept of "author" should be further discarded in order to strengthen the refinement of the study of vernacular novel literature.
The general fiction issues discussed in the history of literature and the history of the novel often refer to the common tendency of the series of text groups, and there is certainly no need to particularly dwell on the issues of "author" and "version" in this context. However, the evaluation of literary history, especially the more general analysis of art and the elaboration of the main idea, often focuses on a certain version (and mostly the most representative) text.
What is important here is the text specificity of this specific version. For example, the golden version of "Water Margin" and the mao version of "Three Kingdoms", the main part of the whole book of course follows the previous content, but those most literary, even with "modern" subtleties, are often compiled and rewritten by these two critics in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties. If we want to describe and study these contents, we must examine the specific historical time and actual impact of this text, and distinguish between its origins from the author/narrator/commentator/copyer, etc. The earlier so-called "Shi Nai'an" and "Luo Guanzhong" may wish to be shelved for the time being.
From the perspective of attribution, those important amendments in later generations are of course eligible to join the ranks of "authors" (of course, the specific signatures and styles can be discussed again). And if we study the masterpieces of the novel in greater detail, it seems that it is more important to systematically describe the development process of the book and the version, and avoid using the name of a certain author to summarize the text that has been changing over the past hundred years—this often leads researchers into certain misunderstandings. From the perspective of "history", the history of fiction should deeply present the complex and layered process of the generation and revision of vernacular novels, in order to judge the changes in the form of texts[17], rather than obscuring history itself with overly simple symbols.
A Brief Introduction to the Literature of Chinese Novels in the Twentieth Century
Third, as a monograph literature study, it is necessary to think about what is the core meaning of the author's research. As a purely truth-seeking study, the independent significance of the author's research is beyond doubt.
But on this basis, if you want to determine whether a novel is from or not from the hands of a certain author, how it helps other areas of novel research needs to be more clearly speculated and argued.
Ancient literary research has a tradition of "knowing people on the world" and "opposing intentions", but in the study of vernacular novels, even in those novels that determine the "author", such relationships are often quite subtle- literary and vernacular writing are two different sets of linguistic logic, and authors often make secretive and secretive statements about the creation of vernacular novels, which adds more difficulty to in-depth research, and the identity of the author (often proved by literary materials) and the creation of vernacular literature are not easy to find a solid relationship [18]. As a result, author research may become a symbolic study, rather than a key basis for directly influencing the study of other areas of the novel.
If the only literary value of "Shi Nai'an" is to write "Water Margin", then the "Water Margin" signed by Zhang Nai'an and Li Nai'an has no essential influence. From the point of view of the history of literary thought, it does not matter who the author of the novel is, but when it is written and has an impact[19], and the study of authors who helps to solve this problem is a more valuable comprehensive proposition, while the rest should be regarded as an independent proposition. At the same time, another concern arises from time to time: the so-called "comprehensive" study actually adopts some overly radical method of argumentation, sometimes leading to misleading other propositions. We will continue to deal with this in the next section.
Statue of Shi Nai'an
Second, the basic methods and interpretation of the author are considered
The main thing described in the previous section is the theoretical limitations of the analysis of the problem of "author". Even if these problems are not considered, starting from specific research alone, some of the research methods and evidence ideas of the academic community on "author evidence" are also worthy of systematic reflection and improvement. How to connect historical figures with a particular novel text requires the use of more sophisticated research methods.
Due to the limited literature and the fact that ancient literati often concealed their own vernacular novel creation, a considerable number of works could not determine the specific identity of the "author". Although the authors of some novels can find some clues and even appear a few "candidates" with higher probabilities, the basis for being able to call them "ironclad evidence" is often insufficient.
As far as common sense is concerned, different documents recording the same event have different evidentiary effects due to the different nature of historical materials. In previous studies related to the authors of novels, scholars have explored the authenticity of documents, that is, the level of cultural relics identification- in fact, this is actually in line with the endless emergence of fake cultural relics. For the accuracy of the content of the literature record (or correct), especially the relationship between the author's vision, tendency and specific conclusions, there are relatively few studies with conscious reflection, and there is no theoretical summary.
《Ancient Chinese Literature Historical Materials》
The general works on "historical materials" in the academic circles have relevant discussions on the classification and identification of historical materials[20], but the main ones are still inductive "general principles", which are systematically layered according to the particularity of novel literature, which seems to be insufficient. This article attempts to make a preliminary analysis of the literature and historical materials related to the author of the novel, and more in-depth case studies are yet to be done.
First, use your own self-report. If the author himself signs a certain place in the book, mentions the author's name in the work, or declares his writing process in other works, this is generally considered the most reliable material.
Second, the use of external evidence records. For example, the author's friend, at the same time or a little later, according to certain materials to determine that someone wrote a certain text, such materials are mostly highly valued by scholars and occupy an important position in the author's research.
Third, use text details. For example, from the information revealed in the novel work, infer what kind of person the author may be/cannot be, thus narrowing the scope of the study. This kind of material, the component of "reasoning" is much higher than that of "examination", which can only be understood as circumstantial evidence, but due to the limited nature of the author's material, it often becomes an argument that many scholars focus on.
The above is just a very rough classification. Ideally, the boundaries of several types of materials are relatively clear, and the general evidence validity can be estimated, and they can echo and analyze each other to obtain the only possibility.
For example, according to the usual way of thinking, the evidentiary effect of the above three types of materials is generally decreasing, and its level can be judged. However, in actual research, the situation faced will be very complex, reflecting the high difficulty of research by authors of vernacular novels. Due to the limited literature, scholars are often overwhelmed by excessive joy when confronted with materials and do not have time to scrutinize them carefully. Such conclusions are not necessarily wrong; but the process of argumentation must be problematic.
For example, "the author's self-way" seems to be the first-hand information, but how it should be used, the understanding of the academic community is also relatively different.
The first time in "Dream of the Red Chamber"
The most famous is the first "wedge" in "Dream of the Red Chamber", in which it is described as "changing the "Stone Record" to the "Record of Love Monks". To Wu Yufeng's title is "Dream of the Red Chamber". East Lukong Meixi is inscribed "Treasure Book of the Wind and Moon". Later, because Cao Xueqin read it for ten years in the Mourning Red Xuan, added and deleted five times, compiled into a table of contents, and divided into chapters, the title "Jinling Twelve Chao" [21] Of course, the words should first be regarded as Cao Xueqin's self-declaration of personal copyright.
However, if the reader completely sat down on the content, it will lead to many inferences about the process of writing "Dream of the Red Chamber" and the cooperation of authors.
As for the words "to Wu Yufeng's inscription "Dream of the Red Chamber"" and "to the fat Yan Zhai Jia Shu copy and re-comment, still called "Stone Record"" [22], although they appear in the main text of the novel, what is the relationship between this special text and Cao Xueqin's original pen must also be examined first to correctly judge the historical information contained in this material.
The original text of the novel and the author's self-statement are still like this, and the records of friends and the rumors of people at the same time cannot be easily believed without discernment - for example, several historical materials related to Cao Xueqin's death year can point to the sayings of Nongwu, Yanwei, and Jiashen, and one or more must be less accurate.
Apocalypse of Huai'an Fu Zhi
Because the situation of novel creation is relatively special, there are often points worthy of scrutiny in the relevant literature. In the case of the most typical author research such as "Journey to the West", in the absence of clear evidence that the "Journey to the West" in the "Huai'an FuZhi" and other books must be the novel "Journey to the West", many scholars have directly determined that "Journey to the West" was written by Wu Chengen [23]. Considering that the situation of the same name and different books in ancient times often appeared, "Journey to the West" itself is not a very special and difficult to match name, this argument is particularly prudent.
There are also many dangers in narrowing down the author's research by using some of the special "linguistic fingerprints" shown in the novel's text.[24] For example, the "Jia Sanjin" theory of "Jin Ping Mei" is a typical example of abuse of inference, which is not uncommon in the study of vernacular novel authors. Even more heavy arguments often confuse inferences with arguments.
For example, the appearance of a dialect word in a novel only proves that the author's literary language is similar to the dialect, but does not prove that the author must be directly related to the dialect area (dialects in other regions may also have similar words), nor does it prove that the author must be a person in the place (may only reside, serve, or collect relevant materials through some means). "Narrowing down" based on the above assumptions is likely to go astray.
Considering the complexity of the novel version, even if there are famous objects and systems of the later era in the text, it cannot completely rule out the possibility of later generations changing, and it is difficult to draw a "conclusion" before it is difficult to clearly demarcate the different levels of the text.
Phenomena such as concealing one's own name[25] and entrusting oneself to others[26] have also appeared in the study of vernacular fiction, and these problems together constitute an obstacle to the study of vernacular fiction authors.
In short, as far as the existing literature is concerned, the intersection of authenticity and falsification of relevant content abounds, and a material is only a historical material in terms of materials, but it may contain a variety of properties and different stages of content at the same time, and if researchers cannot always maintain a cautious attitude towards the material, it is easy to draw less rigorous conclusions.
《Classical Chinese Literature Hetology》
At present, many novel authors have and will continue to have major controversies, and it is difficult to have 100% iron cases, but before making inferences, at least the materials should be checked in accordance with the basic procedures of classical philology and evidence science, so as to avoid rash use and even based on conclusions.
In addition, authors' examinations often lead to a more question worthy of scrutiny:
In previous studies, some scholars have accepted some specific hypotheses studied by the authors, and proposed new ideas for the interpretation of the novel, and regarded this hypothesis as documentary evidence. Such statements, although often form self-consistent circular arguments, can only be regarded as "hypotheses". The hypothesis based on the hypothesis is often dangerous to build towers on the sand. The fictionality and openness of the novel text also allow for the existence of multiple views, and the hypotheses that seem to contradict each other often coexist in the same academic context.
Such expositions sometimes have a misleading effect on the novel's implications, explorations, and interpretations of the original purpose, and it is necessary to systematically analyze and clean up. On the positive side, this is the malleability of the study of novel writers— if the literature issue can be clarified, it is enough to update the understanding of the history of the novel in a number of key places.
III. Author Research and the Prospect of Vernacular Novel Philology
This paper identifies some long-standing complex topics in the study of vernacular novel authors, and is critical of certain tendencies in related research, and believes that these problems have limited the continued advancement of the study of novel history.
Compendium of Philology (Revised Edition)
However, this in no way denies the academic value of the author's research, nor does it deny the academic historical contributions of the previous sages' research. From either point of view, author research occupies a very important position in the study of vernacular novels, and existing materials and arguments have opened up many possible research paths.
The right or wrong of a particular point of view belongs only to the "gain and loss of one city and one place", and does not really affect the evaluation of a literature researcher. The more important evaluation criteria should be based on materials and methods, pay attention to which studies may become the methodological basis for the current research of vernacular novel literature, and give a higher academic history evaluation.
In fact, we hope to point out that it is precisely because this issue is extremely important and complex that practitioners should continuously improve their methodological awareness and promote in-depth research. This may be an important entry point to promote the paradigm of novel philology and even the study of novel history.
We believe that the theoretical reflection on the systematic promotion of this issue cannot only stop at case analysis and review, but must stand at the height of novel history, combine the existing research methods of philology, and make systematic and comprehensive speculation. If a "Vernacular Novel Literature Methodology" style can be formed, I believe it will be of great benefit to promote this field. The idea of the trial appointment is as follows:
First, the awareness of literature "learning" should be further strengthened.
From a rough point of view, although vernacular novel literature researchers are also engaged in literature research, their relationship with other literature research is relatively distant; although there is a relatively rich research accumulation in individual cases, academic thinking is slightly too brief. When observing and drawing on some of the examinations and inferences of previous novel literature scholars, we should pay attention to whether the entire argumentation process conforms to the norms of traditional philology and evidence science. For some texts of a complex nature, reference should be made to the research ideas and theoretical consciousness of philologists on early manuscripts in recent years to promote more in-depth research on novel literature.
《Chinese Literature Philology》
Second, the perspective of the "history" of the novel should be corresponding to the literature research.
If there is a certain possibility of "learning" in the study of vernacular novel literature, then at least within the field there should be relatively clear literature screening standards, and on the basis of fully grasping the complexity of the literature, attention should be paid to those research laws that may become "consensus".
For example, while examining the author and explanatory text of "Jin Ping Mei", consideration should be given to what impact this evaluation criterion will have on the study of the authors of "Dream of the Red Chamber", and what kind of face the history of the development of vernacular novels will look like from this perspective. Historians should have a righteous example, and a novel history that is limited by documentary materials may not present "conclusive conclusions", but should show logical self-consistency in the basic norms of documentary bibliography.
Third, the boundary between "conclusive" and "hypothesis" should be further clarified.
"Iron evidence" is limited, and researchers are naturally required to exert their talents to promote academic research with inference. However, "inference" is ultimately a study with obvious limitations. In the several controversial works mentioned above, there have been different opinions in the academic community on how the "authors" of each book should be labeled, and whether participants at certain stages can determine.
Of course, there is a difference in the probability of establishment between different opinions, but it is particularly important to pay attention to the fact that the hypothesis with a higher probability of establishment should not be directly regarded as a conclusive conclusion. The most typical self-narrated legend of "Dream of the Red Chamber", whether it can be established and measured geometry, there is still a certain amount of controversy, and the specific descriptions of different scholars are also different or even checked. However, due to the large number of proponents, they stacked on top of the hypothesis, making it difficult for the average researcher to determine which expositions are based on rigorous examination of reliable historical materials and which are just speculations when they first look into this field.
Chinese Literature and Historical Materials
Fourth, the relationship between academic expression and writing should also be as standardized as possible.
Each literature researcher has its own basic theory of examination and inference, and also has different cognitions of the nature of literature and research norms. If the reader does not understand this in depth, it is difficult to understand past research on the most central topics. Some expressions of terminology can easily lead to preconceived notions. Due to objective conditions, it is difficult for researchers to elaborate on these issues in each paper. This may require two parallel approaches: only after the relevant issues and the meaning of the expression are sorted out in detail and a certain consensus is obtained based on a more rigorous research review, it is easier to adopt the conventional way of discussion. This, too, is a systematic exercise. Limited by space, this article is only a brick throwing and leading jade, and it is expected that colleagues in the academic circles will work together.
Swipe up or down to view the comments
exegesis:
[1] Lu Xun's "Novel Old Notes" (Beixin Bookstore, 1926), Kong Yijing's "Historical Materials of Chinese Novels" (Shanghai Zhonghua Bookstore, 1936), Zhu Yixuan's "Essays on the Study of Chinese Novel Historiography" (Nankai University Press, 1999).
[2] More famous ones include Pan Jianguo's "Examination of Ancient Novel Literature Series" (Zhonghua Bookstore, 2006), Miao Huaiming's "Brief Introduction to Chinese Novel Literature in the Twentieth Century" (Zhonghua Bookstore, 2009), etc.
[3] Scholars have also mentioned "Red Philology" (Zhou Ruchang: "Red Philology", Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), No. 5, 2002, pp. 1-3. Du Zhijun and Zhang Yun, "Outline of Red Literature", Chinese Literature Studies, No. 3, 2016, pp. 34-38. Zhao Jianzhong, "Literature Research on the Dream of the Red Chamber and the Construction of the Discipline of Red Studies", Journal of Henan Institute of Education (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), No. 4, 2016, pp. 1-5), but its thinking is often different from this article.
[4] For example, most of the research on Cao Xueqin's life and the creative process of "Dream of the Red Chamber" is based on inference, and the interpretation of materials is obviously controversial, but some literary history works do not systematically present these issues, nor do they clearly distinguish between "conclusion" and "speculation" in the description.
[5] Taking "Dream of the Red Chamber" as an example, the description of Cao Xueqin's writing process in literary history, the confirmation and criticism of the identity of Li Yanzhai, and the identification of the author of the last forty times are more or less mixed with misrepresentation (or at least the view that there are obvious argument flaws); and the fallacies that can affect the public, such as "Qin Xue", are innumerable.
[6] Du Zexun: An Outline of Philology, Zhonghua Bookstore, 2005, p. 6.
[7] See Luo Zhitian, "Literary Aphasia: Sorting Out the National History and the Examination of Literary Studies", Inheritance in Fission, Chinese Culture and Scholarship in the Early 20th Century (Revised Edition), Zhonghua Bookstore, 2019, pp. 251-327.
[8] Of course, the complexity of early manuscript literature, especially pre-Qin texts, is not inferior to that of vernacular fiction literature. This will also be discussed later, only in terms of the common "author-work" correspondence in later generations.
[9] Luo Guanzhong, "Revised Explanation" of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, People's Literature Publishing House, 2019, p. 2.
[10] Yisu, ed., Compilation of Materials on the Dream of the Red Chamber, Zhonghua Bookstore, 2004, pp. 31-32.
[11] I have conducted a series of studies on this issue (Chen Hong: "Journey to the West" "The Origin of The True Truth", New Century Library, No. 3, 2002, pp. 3-5; "Journey to the West" "Heart Ape" Examination", Nankai Journal, No. 1, 2009, pp. 19-26; "The "Full Truth" Link of the Journey to the West book from the Name of Sun Wukong", "Social Sciences of Chinese Universities", No. 7, 2013, pp. 86-94; "Journey to the West" and the New Evidence of the Origin of QuanzhenJiao" , Literary Heritage, No. 5, 2015, pp. 172-178), see also
[12] Huang Yongnian and Huang ShouchengDian School: "Preface" to Journey to the West, Zhonghua Bookstore, 2018, p. 1.
[13] Sun Xun: A Preliminary Study on the Fat Of the Dream of the Red Chamber, Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 1981, p. 43.
[14] Of course, some scholars believe that the lipid batches are all approved by Li Yanzhai alone. Most of these statements are indiscriminately mentioned in Zhou Ruchang's "One-Man Theory of Fat Deformity" (for details, see Zhou Ruchang: "New Certificate of the Dream of the Red Chamber (Revised Edition)", Chapter 9 "Fat Yan Zhai Criticism", Zhonghua Bookstore, 2016, pp. 702-718), but this is only a family statement that has not been agreed upon, and does not represent the understanding held by the collator when marking the author. The discussion here deals only with the issue of "style".
[15] Shi Nai'an and Luo Guanzhong, "Foreword" of Water Margin, People's Literature Publishing House, 2019, p. 1. It is worth noting that the copyright page of this edition is only signed "Shi Nai'an", which is also a lack of detail.
[16] Cao Xueqin, Anonymous Continuation, Cheng Weiyuan and Gao Hu, "Dream of the Red Chamber", People's Literature Publishing House, 2008.
[17] The research idea of replacing the "one-line evolution theory" with "ancient book morphology" has been found in the study of books such as Lao Tzu ("Peking University, Western Han Bamboo Book "Lao Tzu" will be published soon, and promote the development of the study of ancient books in Jian Shu to "text morphology"", China Social Science Daily, December 17, 2012). The use of many old manuscripts of novels that have gradually been discovered in modern times as some kind of special "unearthed documents" also helps to open up research ideas.
[18] For example, scholars have different opinions on whether Wu Cheng'en's poems can prove/falsify their relationship with Journey to the West.
[19] In this regard, Luo Zongqiang's History of Literary Thought in the Ming Dynasty (Zhonghua Bookstore, 2013) is more well-handled, not limited to the novel "chengshu", but from the perspective of its influence on social "literary thought".
[20] For details, see He Zhongli's "Historiography of Ancient Chinese History" (Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House, 2012), Part II, "Identification and Utilization of Historical Materials", zhang Keli's "Historiography of Ancient Chinese Literature" (Phoenix Publishing House, 2011) "Method Compilation", etc.
[21] Cao Xueqin, "The Reappraisal of the Stone Record of Fat Yan Zhai (Jia Shu Ben)", People's Literature Publishing House, 2017, p. 15.
[22] Cao Xueqin, "The Reappraisal of the Stone Records of Fat Yan Zhai (Jia Shu Ben)", pp. 15-16.
[23] For a brief retrospective of the history of the author's research of "Journey to the West", see Cai Tieying: "The Unmissable 'Chronicle of Huai'an Fu' and the 'Epitaph of The Ancestors of the Ancestors's House]: On the Theory and Methodology of the Dispute Between the Authors of "Journey to the West"", Journal of Huaiyin Normal University, No. 3, 2021, pp. 297-298. As far as the available materials are concerned, it can only indicate that a certain probability is high, and it cannot be considered that a conclusion has emerged that is sufficient to "hammer the nail on the head".
[24] Yang Lin, "Three "Linguistic Fingerprints" in the Words and Phrases of the Golden Plum Bottle, Chinese Classics and Culture, No. 2, 2016, pp. 67-77.
[25] For example, Chen Chen's "Water Margin Later Biography", written in the early Qing Dynasty, is entrusted to the "relics of the ancient Song Dynasty", and clearly states that "when shi and Luo are not far away, or at the same time, they are not inferior, nor can they be known" (Qiao Yu: "Water Margin Later Biography", Huang Lin, ed., "Small Talks of the Past Dynasties", vol. 1, Phoenix Publishing House, 2018, p. 123).
[26] For example, Xiao Yaozi's "Dream of the Red Chamber after the Later" falsely claims that "it is the original manuscript of Cao Xueqin", and misleads readers with "Mrs. Cao's wife sent Mr. Cao Xueqin's family letter" (Xiao Yaozi: "Preface to the Dream of the Red Chamber", Chunfeng Literature and Art Publishing House, 1985, p. 9).