Author| Wong Wai-lew (Professor, Chinese University, Hong Kong)
Lecture notes on Wenxin Carved Dragon, by Gong Pengcheng, Edition: University | Guangxi Normal University Press, January 2021
Teach people to read, read people, read the world, and read theory
Gong Pengcheng's wenshizhe is omniscient, and the study of the so-called "Dragon Science" "Wenxin Carved Dragon" (hereinafter referred to as "Wenxin") will be involved in itself. In fact, in 1978, when he was a graduate student at the age of 22, he had published the article "Wenxin Carved Dragon Stylistic Theory" (1); since then, relevant papers have been published, and after how many dragon years and the year of the horse and the year of the monkey "accumulation of treasures", in 2021, his five-hundred-page dragon science masterpiece "Wenxin Carved Dragon Lecture" (hereinafter referred to as "Lecture Notes") was published. The "Lecture Notes" consists of fifteen lectures, which is a record of his lectures at Peking University. The order of the titles of each lecture is: Introduction to "Wenxin Carved Dragon"; Liu Xun and His People; The Era of Liu Xun's Existence; Literary Theory in the Society of Scripture and Etiquette; The Classics in Literary Theory; The Tradition of Literary Interpretation; The Text of "Wenxin Carved Dragon"; Liu Xun's View of Literary History; Literary History and Literary History; Text-Literature-Culture; Stylistic Theory of "Wenxin Carved Dragon"; Literary Situation Theory of "Wenxin Carved Dragon"; "Wenxin Carved Dragon" and "Anthology of Literature"; "Wenxin Carved Dragon" and "Poetry"; and Wenxin Yu Theory.
Mencius said that "Zhiren on the World" said that our papers should also "know the world of literature"; the zhiwen theory of the world, combined with the "internal research" and "epitaxial research" mentioned in the Westerners' papers, has similarities. Professor Gong's "Lecture Notes" is different from the general dragon studies treatise, precisely because it attaches great importance to the "outside" aspect when it is "inside" and "outside". He discussed the text of "Wen Xin" and the author Liu Xun, which can already be called "epitaxial research"; as everyone knows, when he talked about Liu Xun's era in the third lecture, even the military, political, and social environment of the Southern Qi and Northern Wei dynasties was thoroughly analyzed. He wrote: "Xiao Daocheng asked the people to give him the Zen seat, and after receiving zen, he actually killed all the ancestors of the original old dynasty, which was very cruel. (p. 68) This incident has nothing to do with Liu Xun, and the erudite Professor Gong shows his rich historical knowledge here.
As if the Wenxin spoke of Buddhism, india, and the language of India, he pointed out that there are "more than a dozen official languages in India, which are very complex" (p. 49); there are still many other "irrelevant" contents. Irrelevant, but can increase the reader's knowledge and fun to read the book. Professor Gong is so clever that he tells these "irrelevant" (or unrelated) things that may cause misunderstandings or criticisms; so it is necessary to clearly tell the reader that his book "is not aimed at the book" and "just uses this book as an example to teach people how to read, read people, read the world, read theory." He quoted the Yi Da Beast as saying that "a gentleman acts with a lot of knowledge, and uses his virtue with his animal" to clarify his intentions. ("Self-Introduction" page 2) Reading the "Lecture Notes" can be said to be a small general studies course in Chinese literature, history and philosophy.
Gong Pengcheng was born in Taipei In 1956 and is originally from Ji'an, Jiangxi. He was the Dean of the Faculty of Arts of Tamkang University, the founding president of the University of South China and Fo Guang University in Taiwan, and won the Taiwan Zhongshan Literature and Art Award, the Chung Hsing Literature and Art Award, the Outstanding Research Award and other awards, and the title of Top Ten Famous Teachers on the Taiwan Campus. Since 2004, he has served as a distinguished professor of Beijing Normal University and Peking University, and a chair professor of Shandong University. His major works include "Literary Walk", "Fifteen Lectures on Traditional Chinese Culture", "Discussion on Book Art", "Introduction to Traditional Chinese Studies", "Forty Self-Descriptions of Gong Pengcheng", "History of Chinese Poetry", "History of Chinese Literary Criticism", "History of Chivalry", etc. More than 160 kinds.
The distinction between pure literature and miscellaneous literature is a false proposition
Of course, no matter how high and far this dapeng flies in this book, it always revolves around the center of "Wenxin". For the key word "wen", he had important things to say, in the seventh lecture. The meaning of the Chinese word "wen", as Professor Gong puts it, is indeed very complex: he analyzes the ten meanings of "wen" in this regard, which are several more than those analyzed by the late Chinese scholar Liu Ruoyu in his book Chinese Theories of Literature. Liu Xun's discussion of "literature" (which we will compare to today's "literature" for the sake of facilitating discussion) is very extensive; many contemporary dragon scholars believe that its scope is too broad and the content is too complicated. Professor Gong dismisses this criticism. He said that "the distinction between pure literature and miscellaneous literature is actually a false proposition, and it is never possible to find the boundary between this 'division'"; "Is poetry pure literature?" Zhou Xiaotian won lu xun's literature prize for poems, such as "Yanhuang descendants run eight hundred million, do not steam steamed And even those with conscience probably wouldn't think it was more literary than the OriginalLy written book. (p. 198) I am convinced that it is not appropriate to draw a clear line between "pure" and "miscellaneous".
The organization of words, with people, things, and things as the content, with lyricism or reasoning as the purpose, with rules and laws, is literature. Isn't that what some people think of as "non-literary" or "miscellaneous" applied texts? The themes and ideas of literature are originally very "miscellaneous", how can they be "pure"? Now we imitate the West and divide the genres of literature into four categories: poetry, prose, novels, and dramas, thinking that the boundaries are clear; but there are small categories in the large categories, and there are "cross-categories" between the classes (such as the so-called prose poems). Although the four categories are widely supported, they are not all convinced. Rene Wellek and Austin Warren's Theory of Literature excludes prose from the four broad categories of "imaginative literature" (Dichtung). China is the "country of poetry" and the "country of prose"; excluding prose, Chinese literature has removed at least half of the country, at least a quarter.
Among the dragon scholars, "pure" literary commentators were criticized by Gong Pengcheng. Zhang Taiyan agreed with Wen Xin's literary view, that is, an inclusive view; Gong called MeiZhang said, writing: "What is wrong with Liu Xun discussing all the articles? That is to say, Chinese the scope of the paper is always right. Only modern people have fallen for the modern Western "pure literature" theory, and in turn ridiculed the ancients. (p. 199) My long-standing view is that the classification of literature is extremely complex, and many categories are difficult to draw a clear line. We can refer to and even adopt the division of the four categories, but it is not advisable for Wellek and Warren to eliminate the general category of prose. Everything in literature can be discussed, and the performance of writers can be praised or derogatorily; but on the question of what is literature, our attitude should be "tolerant and great.".
Fifteen Lectures on Traditional Chinese Culture, by Gong Pengcheng, Edition: Peking University Press, September 2006
He thoroughly discusses the relationship between the Wenxin and the classics
Another core thesis of "Wen Xin" is the influence of Liu Xun's classic in terms of ideology and writing. Many scholars do not have confidence in the logical and systematic thinking of the Chinese nation, they know that Liu Xun studied the Buddhist classics, and there are a number of Buddhist scriptures in the "Wenxin", so they believe that the exposition methods and organizational methods of this book are learned from the Buddhist scriptures, and the ideas of this book are also greatly related to Buddhism.
Let's start with thoughts. Those who have carefully read "Wen Xin" will surely think that this book spreads Confucianism. The Preface reads: "When the teeth are standing, then taste the ritual vessel of the night dream and the lacquer, and go south with Zhongni." Dan and Yu, Nai Yi but happy, dah! The difficulty of the saints is the dream of the children! Since the birth of a man, there has not been a master like a master. Praise the Holy Will, Mo Ruo's commentary on the scriptures, and Ma Zheng Zhuru, Hongzhi has been refined; there is a deep understanding, not enough to establish a home. Only the use of the article, the actual classic branches, the five ceremonial resources to the written, the six canons for the purpose of the use, the monarch so Binghuan, the military so clear; detailed its origin, can not be a classic. ”
This large passage, together with the contents of several articles of the Original Tao, the Zhengsheng, and the Sutra, does not need to cite other chapters, is not enough to fully explain the motivation for writing this book? Is it not enough to fully explain that confucianism is to be preached? The fifth lecture of the "Lecture Notes" takes "Classics in Literary Theory" as the theme, which is to clearly point out Liu Xun's inheritance and development of Confucius's thought, and in particular to explain the "close integration" between Liu Xun's literary theories and classics. Gong Pengcheng writes that "all the literary styles discussed in this book are derived from the Five Classics, and the Five Classics are also the highest examples of writing, and the various styles are explained according to the teachings of ancient texts and scriptures" (p. 122). This lecture is probably the most thorough exposition ever made on the relationship between Wenxin, Confucianism, and sutras.
Cultural Semiotics, by Gong Pengcheng, Edition: Shanghai People's Publishing House, January 2009
The analytical and systematic writing of "Wenxin" comes from the Buddhist scriptures?
Another issue of great concern is the system and structure. Many scholars, including Rao Zongyi, believe that its writing style is influenced by Buddhism, because they believe that "Chinese writing is generally scattered, such as the Analects and Lao Tzu have no structural system", while the Buddhist scriptures have. Gong Pengcheng retorted in the fifth lecture: "Those who speak these words are really very laymen in han dynasty classics. (p. 135) He cites several "systematic" Han Chinese works such as the Commentaries on the Interpretation of Texts, the Interpretation of Names, and the White Tiger Tongyi as counterproductives of the Theory of Influence by Buddhism.
I also think that the systematic and structural nature of wenxin comes from the Buddhist scriptures is unacceptable. For more than a hundred years, people who believed in the West but did not believe in China often slandered the ancients. Wang Guowei, who is known as a master of traditional Chinese studies, believes that the Chinese people lack an analytical mind and lack the ability to construct a system. The recently aired TV series "Great Qin Fu" mentions the "Lü Shi Chunqiu" written by the leadership of Lü Buwei, and we will take this book as an example: it is divided into twelve ages, eight books, and six treatises, all of which are more than 200,000 words, and although the content is "miscellaneous", it is a big book with a system. Liu Xun mentioned the "Lü's Spring and Autumn" at least three times, one of which praised it as "Jianyuan Body Week", which is exactly what body example Zhou Bei means. He also talked about books such as "Huainanzi" and "Shiji", are not these books also analytical and systematic? In this case, some dragon scholars believe that the Wenxin is analytical and systematic, because it is influenced by the Buddhist scriptures, and we can't help but ask: Why is the Wenxin not influenced by books such as Lü, Huai, and Shi, but can only be influenced by the Buddhist scriptures?
We respect "Wenxin", the most concise and commonly used praise is "body big worry week", "body" is the meaning of the system. Systems involve structure. Of course, this book has an organization and structure, and Liu Xun has his "master's own way" in the "Preface". Dragon scholars have always interpreted it completely according to the "self-tao", or thought that the structure of Liu Xun's "self-tao" tree was not clear enough and the branches were not clear enough, so they adjusted it. As Gong Pengcheng said: There are actually many people who think that the book has problems with its structure, and these problems are mainly concentrated in the second half." (p. 437) Citing wang Meng'ou and Li Yuegang's reordering of the book's chapters as an example, he points out that many scholars are "dissatisfied with its organizational structure" (p. 439). That's exactly what happened.
"Forty Self-Descriptions of Gong Pengcheng", by Gong Pengcheng, Edition: China Workers Publishing House, May 2008
The organization of the chapters of "Wenxin" is not satisfactory
Gong Pengcheng once said that one of the purposes of the "Lecture Notes" is to "use this book as an example to teach people how to read", and here Teacher Gong did give a "lesson": we must be careful and discerning, and we must seek truth from facts. The Wenxin is a classic, even a great scripture; but it is not the Bible, and its content is not a religious truth that "a word cannot be changed." One of the earliest classics of Chinese literature, "Leaving sorrows", has always been controversial in terms of how to divide and segment, which means that there is a problem with its structure; I do not shy away from the suspicion of "offending" the classics, and published an article entitled "Resignation and Resignation, Drowning Wounds and Chaos". Coincidentally, what I use to criticize the structure of "Leaving sorrow" is the theory of the "Melting Cut" section in the "Wenxin". （2）
As Professor Gong put it, the structural problems of Wenxin "are mainly concentrated in the second half", that is, the second half of the beginning of the twenty-sixth chapter. I have two approaches to the rearrangement of the Wenxin chapters, probably the most "bold" ever. The first is: 1-5 articles are "Theory of Wenyuan" and 6-25 are "Theory of Style", and these two parts are according to the theory of the masses; in the next twenty-five articles, I am divided into seven parts: "Theory of Literary Thought", "Theory of Literary Style", "Theory of Literary Principles", "Theory of Literary Collection", "Theory of Literature", "Literary Commentary", "Theory of Literature and History", and the specific chapters included in each treatise are not listed here. The second is: taking the title of "Wenxin" as the key words of "sentiment" and "change", and constructing a literary theory system of combining Chinese and Western styles on the basis of the main content of "Wenxin"; this new "rearrangement" is a very subversive construction of "Wenxin", and with my "ambition" in place, it is not convenient to elaborate here (3). The content of the Wenxin is indeed "unsatisfactory", and the organizational structure of each article is only one of them; the others, as Gong Shi said, "the meaning of the words is unstable, the boundaries are not clear, the quotations often change their meaning, or there are too many metaphors", in a nutshell, it is "not strict in its own language and theory" (p. 334). I completely agree with Gong's judgment. To give you one or two examples: The word "wind bone" in the "Wind Bone" chapter has been debated by dragon scholars for at least a hundred years, and the most controversial opinions are the most controversial, and the conclusion is inconclusive; the word "de" in the first sentence of the first sentence of the "Wenxin" "Wen zhi is also great" should be interpreted, and there is no conclusion.
The "Practice of Characters" section points out the importance of practicing characters, and the "Commentaries" section believes that the discourse text should be "sharp and precise", but Liu Xun's pen often cannot do it. I once joked in the seminar that the "Wind Bone" chapter is probably a chapter of Liu Xun's drinking and drunken grass - in fact, Liu Xun drinks alcohol or not I don't know, maybe I have to ask the erudite Professor Gong to examine it. As for not being able to do "sharp precision", I can quote the "ancient texts" in the "Finger Flaws" section,...... Worry is difficult to round, rarely flawless disease" for Liu Yanhe to play round field. The Wenxin itself has "flaws" that we should point out; if the opinions of the Dragon Scholars are inappropriate and pertinent, we should also point them out.
Blunt criticism of Longxue's predecessors
In 1978, Gong Pengcheng wrote a stylistic treatise on wenxin (p. 315) that "criticized his predecessor Mr. Xu Fuguan", when he was young and vigorous, "arrogant and proud", and many predecessors in academia were afraid of him. He became the president of the university around the age of forty — so I often call him "President Gong"; the "arrogance" has converged, and the gentleness is much thicker, but his outspoken nature remains unchanged. Whether it is the former Xu Fuguan or the later Rao Zongyi, he does not shy away from it: "Mr. Rao also said that because Buddhism has the most 'heart', it is the Wenxin Carved Dragon that it will be named 'Wenxin'. This is also wrong. (p. 60) Criticizes scholars by name, but also criticizes the current academic community, and thus defends the tradition: "Modern people often say that we Chinese not good at thinking and debating"; in fact, "our discourse has been like this since the Han Dynasty." In the Song Dynasty academy, there were lectures, lectures, and collective theories." (page 119)
As a scholar straddling the Taiwan Strait, Gong Pengcheng also commented on the two sides of the strait, holding that scholars from both sides are not familiar with each other's academic situation; in terms of dragon studies, mainland scholars say that the research of young scholars in Taiwan is not deep enough, and this statement is not "in line with the real situation." He further pointed out that "in the 1980s and 1990s, Mr. Wang Gengsheng and other elders actually existed as objects of criticism"; the "younger generations" like himself at that time actually did not look at the "achievements" of the older scholars in dragon science. Our research is carried out precisely to surpass them"; and "we feel that it is far superior to that of the elders". (p. 330) Followed by his description of the "new horizon" of dragonology of Taiwan's new generation of scholars, including "Wenxin from the Perspective of the Framework of Contrast between Chinese and Foreign Literary Theories", and introducing the relevant works of the "younger generation" scholars Shen Qian, Huang Weiliang (4), Gong Pengcheng, and Cai Yingjun.
History of Chinese Literary Criticism, by Gong Pengcheng, Edition: Peking University Press, July 2008
A grand statement that is unique and full of meanings
Wenxin is a small and large book: it is only more than 37,000 words long, but it discusses literature for more than a thousand years, including more than 200 writers and 35 genres. Although the text is condensed, the content is very full. "Wen Xin" itself is a "macro theory", and the dragon science that arises from it must be a university question. This university has attracted a large number of scholars to study in the past hundred years, And Long Bolong's uncle, brother, brother, sister, and sister have worked together to promote dragon science to become a prominent science, and the number of treatises has increased a lot after being statistically compiled by Professor Qi Liangde a few years ago, which is really unclear. "Why should I add another copy?" Gong Pengcheng asked like many of his peers. Because there is something to say, and there are many important things to say. My reading notes quote too little from the contents of the "Commentary" that have won my heart and benefited me deeply. For example, he distinguishes the difference between "Wenxin" and "Anthology", which is a new reader's eyes and ears; for example, comparing the similarities and differences between "Wenxin" and "Poetry", it is wonderful. These comments, and so many others, are too late to call for commentary. The "Lecture Notes" are not without a number of places to be considered and discussed, and my reading notes are long, and I am not good enough to deal with them here.
My direction of dragon science is, first, to highlight the theoretical characteristics of Wenxin through the comparison between China and the West, and to explain its regional universality and temporal contiguity; second, to apply its theory to the actual criticism of ancient and modern works at home and abroad, to illustrate its practicality. The "Lecture Notes" uses traditional Chinese literature, history and philosophy as the material for exposition, and sometimes refers to Western treatises; the focus of the speaker's dragon science is different from mine, so my reading of his book has a great role in supplementing my knowledge of dragon science.
Reading "Lectures" has the feeling of rejuvenation: I seem to be an auditor at Peking University, carrying a school bag to school on time at eight o'clock in the morning in the winter, listening to Teacher Gong Pengcheng talk about "Wenxin" and "how to read, read people, read the world, and read theory" in the darkness of the day. The "Lecture Notes" is a "macro theory" of dragon science. I used the current literary buzzword ,"grand narrative," and called the book a unique, eloquent "grand discourse" of dragon science.
【Notes】
(1) Quoted from Gong Pengcheng's Lecture notes on Wenxin Carved Dragon (Guilin: Guangxi Normal University Press, 2021), p. 315; the contents of the book quoted in the following article are only indicated in the main text, without additional annotations.
(2) For my criticism of the structure of "Leaving the Troubles", please refer to Chapter 8 of Huang Weiliang's "Wenxin Carved Dragon: System and Application" (Hong Kong: Wensi Publishing House, 2016).
(3) Please refer to the second chapter of Huang Weiliang's "Wenxin Carved Dragon: System and Application".
(4) Most of my treatises have been published and published in Taiwan, and I have served as a professor or visiting professor in the Department of Foreign Languages of Sun Yat-sen University in Kaohsiung and the Department of Literature of Fo Guang University for many years; Gong Pengcheng placed me among Taiwanese scholars, probably based on these factors.
The author | Huang Weiliang
Editor | Zhang Jin
Proofreading | Chen Diyan