The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature

Last updated

The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature
The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature.jpg
Author Kang-i Sun Chang and Stephen Owen (eds.)
LanguageEnglish
Genre Chinese literature
Publisher Cambridge University Press
Published2010
No. of books2

The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature is a 2-volume history book series published by Cambridge University Press in 2013. [1] The books were edited by Kang-i Sun Chang and Stephen Owen. Volume 1 deals with Chinese literature before the Ming dynasty, and Volume 2 from the Ming dynasty onward.

Contents

Giovanni Vitello of University of Naples "L'Orientale" wrote that translation and other aspects of media circulation, class and gender issues, periodization, and the influence of geography on the creation of literature are among "the major issues for which its editors and authors appear to show a consistent and shared concern." [2]

Background

In 2004, Cambridge University Press invited Kang-i Sun Chang to be the chief editor of The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature. She declined the job at first, but later changed her mind, and invited Stephen Owen of Harvard University as co-editor. The two-volume work was published in 2010. [3]

There were seventeen individuals in total who were involved in writing the chapters and editing the volumes. [4] Robert E. Hegel of Washington University in St. Louis described almost all the authors as "senior scholars recognized as preeminent leaders in their respective fields." [5] Hegel characterised the number of involved people as being relatively few and contrasted their prominence with that of The Columbia History of Chinese Literature , which had multiple writers of varying backgrounds. [6]

Contents

The volumes of the series are as follows:

  1. To 1375 (edited by Stephen Owen), 2010. ISBN   978-0-521-85558-7 [7]
  2. From 1375 (edited by Kang-i Sun Chang), 2010. ISBN   978-0-521-85559-4 [8]

The books delineate dynasties through their literary periods rather than political ones, [9] and the editors argue that a greater importance should be given to literary periods rather than genres, and the editors state that the volumes does not show as much prominence for individuals nor for the classical/modern Chinese divide. [2] Hegel stated that this was done to "avoid simple repetition of conventional generic and period divisions". [4] According to Vitello, the volumes give prominence to ethnic and gender-related issues, and that the study of the circulation of literature and media is "another especially conspicuous feature". [10] Hegel stated that the organisation was done to facilitating chronological reading of the book from the beginning to the end. [4]

Essays generally range from 60 to over 100 pages, and therefore Hegel characterised most essays as being "very long". [4] According to book reviewer William H. Nienhauser, Jr. several "potted biographies" of key people make up substantial portions of introductions of multiple chapters, even though, according to Nienhauser, the introductions of the volumes state this is not the case. [9] Nienhauser called these portions "among the most innovative passages" and concluded that they were "an asset". [9]

The books do not include Chinese characters, and the passages do not include summaries of plots of works discussed. [11]

A topically ordered bibliography, a glossary with titles of works and names of people, and an index characterised by Hegel as "lengthy" are in each volume. Both bibliographies primarily include works in English and do not include works written in Chinese. [12] Some references use Wade-Giles romanisation and therefore a reader would need to use the romanisation to find those works. According to Hegel, the index increases the ease which one can have to find terminology. [13] Hegel characterised some references, particularly ones using Wade-Giles, as "quite old". [13]

Volume I

The first essay, about Chinese literature in its earliest forms, is by Martin Kern. It has 115 pages, making it the longest essay of the volume. [4] David R. Knechtges wrote "From the Eastern Han through the Western Jin (AD 25-317)", about the Han Dynasty and its course, the second chapter. The third, about Eastern Jin and the early Tang Dynasty, is by Tian Xiaofei. [14] The fourth chapter, "The Cultural Tang", had multiple authors, with Stephen Owen being the primary author. [15] "The Northern Song (1020-1126)" by Ronald Egan comes next. [16] "North and South: The Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries," the sixth, is divided into two sections, with one each written by Michael Fuller and Shen-fu Lin. [16] "Literature from the Late Jin to the Early Ming: ca. 1230-ca. 1375" is by Stephen West. [17]

The Tang content is organised into four stages: until 756, 756–791, "mid-Tang", "Last Flowering", and the dissolution of the dynasty. [4]

The bibliography has a total of eight pages, something characterised by Hegel as "short". [13]

Volume II

The first essay, "Literature of the Early Ming to Mid-Ming (1375-1572)," is written by the editor. She argues that historians had hitherto not covered this period. [17] "The Literary Culture of the Late Ming (1573-1644)" by Tina Lu covers that period and its authors. [18] "Early Qing to 1723" is by Lee Wai-yee; the end point is the portion when the Qing dynasty was firmly established. Shang Wei's "The Literati Era and its Demise (1723-1840)" cover's the dynasty's apex and the beginning of its decline. [19] Wilt L. Idema wrote "Prosimetric and Verse Narrative," the fifth chapter, which chronicles the styles of literature in the later dynasties. This chapter was described by Hegel as "shorter [than others] but truly encyclopedic". [20] David Wang wrote the sixth chapter, which was about the evolution to post-1912 Chinese literature. "Chinese Literature from 1937 to the present" by Michelle Yeh covers the last period of literature, with an end note on new media by Michael Hockx. The end chapter is "Sinophone Writings and the Chinese Diaspora" by Jing Tsu. [21]

The Ming content is organised into four periods: until 1450, 1450–1520, 1520–1572, and 1573 onwards. [4]

The bibliography has around 21 pages. [13]

Reception

Robert Hegel praised the "keen understanding of the historical developments". [13] Hegel argued that "excess" detail was the "main fault" as a reader would face an information overload. [22] He also criticised the lack of "literature", since most contributors did not supply quotations, and only of two or three lines. [13] as well as the use of BC and AD, reflecting the Christian calendar instead of BCE and CE. He also stated that the forced reliance on glossaries due to the absence of hanzi "poorly serves the neophyte readers. [22] He also added that institutions with relative financial affluence would be the only ones to afford the volumes due to its relatively high price. [22] Hegel concluded that "I do strongly recommend reading all chapters here, even cover to cover." [22]

William Nienhauser felt that "despite the price and the problems readers will encounter in consulting the work as a reference, these two volumes will remain the standard accounts of Chinese literature for decades to come, and deservedly so." He argued, however, that the indexes were "flawed" and "riddled with problems", and the lack of Chinese characters reduces the values of the volumes, which he felt were overpriced and unaffordable for students. [11] He also stated that a general reader would find the book too lengthy despite Owen stating that the book was also intended to appeal to general readers. [11] Nienhauser suggested that the index and glossary in each volume could have more clear principles and be combined into a single unit, and he concluded. [23]

Vitello wrote that this "marks the most imposing history of Chinese literature that has appeared in a Western language so far". [2] Vitello concluded that the book "is an extraordinary scholarly achievement". [24]

Related Research Articles

The history of Chinese literature extends thousands of years, from the earliest recorded dynastic court archives to the mature vernacular fiction novels that arose during the Ming dynasty to entertain the masses of literate Chinese. The introduction of widespread woodblock printing during the Tang dynasty (618–907) and the invention of movable type printing by Bi Sheng (990–1051) during the Song dynasty (960–1279) rapidly spread written knowledge throughout China. In more modern times, the author Lu Xun (1881–1936) is considered an influential voice of baihua literature in China.

Wang Wei, also known by her courtesy name Xiuwei, was a Chinese courtesan, poet, and traveller during the late-Ming dynasty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wen Zhengming</span>

Wen Zhengming, born Wen Bi, was a Chinese painter, calligrapher, and poet during the Ming dynasty. He was regarded as one of the Four Masters of Ming painting.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Classic Chinese Novels</span> Novels regarded as the greatest and most influential pre-modern Chinese fiction

Classic Chinese Novels are the best-known novels of pre-modern Chinese literature. These are among the world's longest and oldest novels. They represented a new complexity in structure and sophistication in language that helped to establish the novel as a respected form among later popular audiences and sophisticated critics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Guo Pu</span> Chinese writer, historian and poet

Guo Pu, courtesy name Jingchun was a Chinese historian, poet, and writer during the Eastern Jin period, and is best known as one of China's foremost commentators on ancient texts. Guo was a Taoist mystic, geomancer, collector of strange tales, editor of old texts, and erudite commentator. He was the first commentator of the Shan Hai Jing and so probably, with the noted Han bibliographer Liu Xin, was instrumental in preserving this valuable mythological and religious text. Guo Pu was the well educated son of a governor. He was a natural historian and a prolific writer of the Jin dynasty. He is the author of The Book of Burial, the first-ever and the most authoritative source of feng shui doctrine and the first book to address the concept of feng shui in the history of China, making Guo Pu the first person historically to define feng shui, and therefore, Guo Pu is usually called the father of feng shui in China.

<i>Fu</i> (poetry) Chinese poetry form

Fu, often translated "rhapsody" or "poetic exposition", is a form of Chinese rhymed prose that was the dominant literary form during the Han dynasty. Fu are intermediary pieces between poetry and prose in which a place, object, feeling, or other subject is described and rhapsodized in exhaustive detail and from as many angles as possible. Features characteristic of fu include alternating rhyme and prose, varying line length, close alliteration, onomatopoeia, loose parallelism, and extensive cataloging of their topics. Fu composers usually strove to use as wide a vocabulary as possible, and classical fu often contain many rare and archaic Chinese words. They were not sung like songs, but were recited or chanted.

Liu Kezhuang, was a Song Dynasty Chinese poet and literary critic.

<i>Zhuangzi</i> (book) Ancient Chinese text from the late Warring States period

The Zhuangzi is an ancient Chinese text from the late Warring States period (476–221 BC) which contains stories and anecdotes that exemplify the carefree nature of the ideal Taoist sage. Named for its traditional author, "Master Zhuang" (Zhuangzi), the Zhuangzi is one of the two foundational texts of Taoism, along with the Tao Te Ching.

Stephen Owen is an American sinologist specializing in Chinese literature, particularly Tang dynasty poetry and comparative poetics. He taught Chinese literature and comparative literature at Harvard University and is James Bryant Conant University Professor, Emeritus; becoming emeritus before he was one of only 25 Harvard University Professors. He is a member of American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a member of American Philosophical Society.

Wilt L. Idema is a Dutch scholar and Sinologist who taught at University of Leiden and Harvard University (2000-13), presently emeritus at both universities. He specializes in Chinese literature, with interests in early Chinese drama, Chinese women's literature of the premodern period, Chinese popular narrative ballads, and early development of Chinese vernacular fiction.

Gengzi Guobian Tanci is a tanci written by Li Baojia, composed in 1902.

Shanghai Shijie Fanhua Bao was a periodical published in Shanghai, China. The name is often shortened to Fanhua Bao or Shijie Fanhua Bao.

The Tale of Li Wa is a short novella by Bai Xingjian.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lu Zhaolin</span>

Lu Zhaolin, courtesy name Shengzhi, was a Tang dynasty Chinese poet, traditionally grouped together with Luo Binwang, Wang Bo, and Yang Jiong as the Four Paragons of the Early Tang.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yang Jiong</span>

Yang Jiong was a Tang dynasty Chinese poet, traditionally grouped together with Luo Binwang, Lu Zhaolin, and Wang Bo as the Four Paragons of the Early Tang. Known for his eight extant fu (rhapsody) poems, he also wrote an influential preface to the collected works of Wang Bo, in which he criticized the excessive formality of the court poetry of the preceding generation, and lauded the classical style of Wang Bo and Lu Zhaolin.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kang-i Sun Chang</span> Chinese-born American sinologist (born 1944)

Kang-i Sun Chang, is a Chinese-born American sinologist. She is a scholar of classical Chinese literature. She is the inaugural Malcolm G. Chace Professor, and former chair of the Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures at Yale University.

The Cui clan of Qinghe (清河崔氏) was an eminent Chinese family of high-ranking government officials and Confucian scholars. The clan's ancestral home was in Qinghe Commandery (清河郡), which covered parts of present-day Shandong and Hebei provinces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zhu Yunming</span>

Zhu Yunming was a Chinese calligrapher, poet, writer, and scholar-official of the Ming dynasty, known as one of the "Four Talents of Wu" (Suzhou). Most admired for his accomplishment in calligraphy, he is also a popular cultural figure for his uninhibited lifestyle and iconoclastic thinking. He criticized the orthodox Neo-Confucianism of Zhu Xi and admired the philosophy of mind advocated by Wang Yangming. He wrote a large number of essays that criticize traditional values, and was an influence on the iconoclastic philosopher Li Zhi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wang Ao (Grand Secretary)</span>

Wang Ao was a politician, essayist and poet of the Ming dynasty. As a politician during the reign of the Zhengde Emperor, he held the position of Grand Secretary. Wang Ao was also an essayist who was considered a master on eight-legged essays.

Tian Yuan Tan is a Singaporean scholar of Chinese literature. Since 2019, he has served as Shaw Professor of Chinese at the University of Oxford and a Professorial Fellow of University College. Prior to his appointment at Oxford, he was Professor of Chinese Studies at SOAS, University of London.

References

Citations

  1. ↑ "The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature | Asian literature". Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 4 November 2022.
  2. 1 2 3 Vitello 2013, p. 55.
  3. ↑ 孙康宜：患难是我心灵的资产 (in Chinese). Phoenix TV. 25 February 2011. 2004年，当剑桥大学出版社找孙康宜主编《剑桥中国文学史》时，她拒绝了。[...]”孙康宜说。
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Hegel 2012, p. 163.
  5. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 162-163.
  6. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 162.
  7. ↑ Chang, Kang-i Sun; Owen, Stephen, eds. (7 May 2018). The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521855587. ISBN   9781139095419.
  8. ↑ Chang, Kang-i Sun; Owen, Stephen, eds. (7 May 2018). The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature. Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521855594. ISBN   9781139095426.
  9. 1 2 3 Nienhauser 2011, p. 157.
  10. ↑ Vitello 2013, p. 58.
  11. 1 2 3 Nienhauser 2011, p. 158.
  12. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 172.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hegel 2012, p. 173.
  14. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 164.
  15. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 165.
  16. 1 2 Hegel 2012, p. 166.
  17. 1 2 Hegel 2012, p. 167.
  18. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 168.
  19. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 169.
  20. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 170.
  21. ↑ Hegel 2012, p. 171.
  22. 1 2 3 4 Hegel 2012, p. 174.
  23. ↑ Nienhauser 2011, p. 159.
  24. ↑ Vitello 2013, p. 60.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.