Canonization of Chinese Literature in the East and West
Today a Literary canon is defined as the best or most aesthetic works of a society, though the canonization of Chinese literature followed a very different route which will be explored in this article. The evolution of China’s literary canon has many different factors contributing to its formation. The main factors include: Politics, Ideology and, Translation. Depending on the historic political clime, the views of the literati, or in more modern times; the influence of translations of western texts; China’s literary canon would evolve to mach (Stordalen 2007) (Sun 2008) (See 2004). When compared to the canons of Ancient Greece, Egypt or Modern literary canons, China's literary canon has been relatively fixed, though more flexible than the literary canon of Dark Age Catholic Europe, or the Islamic Middle East. This amount of rigidity and flexibility derives from the fact that for most of China’s literary history the Confucian works of the Four Books and Five Classics was at its heart. While the works and supporting works of Confucius and his followers where seen near sacred they did not hold the same religiosity as the works of Mohammed or of Jesus, in the Quran and Bible respectively (Stordalen 2007).
Note to Reader: Because of the many reasons for canonization this paper will be divided into to processes of canonization then chorologically, rather than primarily chronologically then topically. This is to better see the modes of canonization and their effects; since so many overlap and have contributed at the same historical time.
Literary Canon
Before we continue to review the contributing factors to the canonization of Chinese literature it is important to first review several key concepts.
A literary canon denotes a canon of books and other forms of literature that are influential in shaping its target culture. Literary canons are usually works with some aesthetic value, authoritative or superb. Literary canon can extend beyond the written word and can include all forms of art, and the artist. The Canon refered to is that which is Highbrow or High Culture; not to be confused with highly succesful or popular works of art, though some canonical works infact become part of the popular canon (Fernhout 1994).
Traditionally the works and supporting works of Confucius are seen as the canonized classis, though China’s Literary canon extends far beyond these works. Yet in ancient times almost all of the canon was in some way related to the Confucian texs. Also the Four Books and Five Classics are traditionally said to be written by Confucius, it is almost certain that most of the work was in fact written by his followers and scholars years after his death (Chang et alii 2010).
Vectorizing Canons: Canon and because of their ability to form people’s view of life and society (Folkert pp.69).
Vectorized Canons: Canon because they conform to views of life and society that are already established before and outside of the canon (Folkert pp. 69).
Processes of Canozation of Chinese Literature
Individuals and Entities
Many literary canons from all over the world have been affected by literary elites or rulers denoting a work or collection of works to be canonical. While this category could very well fall under “Politics and Ideology” it will give a clear view of people and groups if separated from overall trends in political and ideological history. In ancient to pre-modern history if the literary canon was chosen by groups or entities it was chosen the literati, royal court or emperor. Their motives were usually to legitimize their rule and to retain control of the intellectual power.
Early examples of individuals or entities choosing the canon to retain power surround the works of Confucius. Though attributed to be written by Confucius were more likely a construct of scholar groups who edited and compiled his teachings. This "Scribal Class" of scholars who collected the original Chinese classics could change Confucius words at will. An extreme example of altering the canon comes from when Fu Cheng of Jinan claimed to have discovered lost sections of the Book of History, one of the Five Classics of Confucius. Again scholars sought to alter China’s canon by claiming to find more lost Confucian writing within the walls of Confucius’ lecture hall (Stordalen 2007). Besides the literati altering and adding to the early literary canon of China, emperors also had a great influence on the canon. Qin Shihuangdi who many have not truly preformed a book burning but certainly did limit the schools of learning and the different traditions which were part of the literary canon to solidify his rule (Chang et alii 2010).
In modern times while the populus has the most say on the popular canon of Chinese literature, still a "Scholar class" of authors, litterary professors, historians and presses have power to consensous what is the litterary canon of China.
This section will hopefully bring light to the fact that when dynasties would alter the canon it was mostly the scholar class and imperial government who was doing all the selection.
Politics and Ideology
Since the beginning of written Chinese literature the current politics, history and ideologies of the society mandated the current literary canon. In early Chinese history almost every time a dynasty fell and was supplanted by a new one the dynasty would either alter or use the current canon of literature to legitimized their rule. Evidence of this is found in the Qin dynasty which, primarily used the school of legalism to legitimize their rule. Following was Han Dynasty following who stressed a major emphasis on the Confucian works to legitimize their rule. The Han and many dynasties after solidified their rule and their literary canon by establishing schools that only focused on the literary works in the canon. Also to receive official positions in the government one need to pass a state exam which was always a test of one’s knowledge of the literary classics and canon. One could see how having a canon which supported you rule would be advantageous for any government. For example the works of Confucius stressed loyalty and fealty to your emperor and government officials [8]. This is the type of canonized teachings that the dynasties of China emphasized.
Though there were several works that did become canonized through pure aesthetics rather than for its ideology and politics. The “Lament for Ying” written by Qu Yuan followed a different style than the ruling class and broke all of the rules in which one would normally write poetry. Yet, it’s pure beauty changed the canon thereafter into extensive Fu writings and, more than five character lines which was primarily the style of the Confucian classics. Though ironically his innovative work, for its deep feeling and uniqueness was soon a staple and the form was copied by nobles. This lead to a new ideology of writing and a prime example of vectorizing canonical literature. Others who are great examples of counter culture or vectorizing canonical wroks are Du Fu, and Li Bai who only became establishment after their times (Chang et alii 2010).
Nearing era of Modern China a new wave of politics and ideology affected the Chinese Literary Canon. During the time of the May Fourth Movement (1915-1921) there was an overwhelming national view for westernization. This new ideology drastically changed the canon as the late Qing dynasty (early 1900s) incorporated new western fiction and western literary styles into China’s canon. Also later during the height of the Soviet Union and China’s communism, Soviet writing influenced nearly every aspect of China’s canon. For instance whenever an author was part of the Soviet canon he was immediately famous to China and part of it’s canon. Also disgraced writers from Russia had no chance of canonization or popularity in China (Sun 2008). This purely political and ideological influence of the "Red Canon" or Soveit canon, lead to a non-aesthetic literary canon, but one mandated by the Soviet union (Aiken 1986). A prime example of this is when Stalin claimed that Vladimir Mayakovsky was one of the greatest poets of all time. As quoted by Alexander Mikhailov:
“Stalin made a liberal gesture (a dead poet is no longer dangerous!): he declared that Mayakovsky had been, and still remained, the most talented poet of the Soviet era. Disrespect for his memory was proclaimed a ‘crime.’ In these characteristically Stalinist formulations, admitting no nuance, Mayakovsky was canonized. Henceforth, the poet’s every line was elevated to the ranks of great poetry; the weakest elements in Mayakovsky’s creative legacy were held up as models," (Mikhailov 1992).
Besides Mayakovsky joining the canon purely out of the influnece of the Soviet Union some writers who were not canonized in thier won contry but famous in the soviet union jion the chinese canon. For instance English writter Ethel Lilian Voynich, was quite unknown in the west but he novel The Gadfly was exteremly popular in the Soviet Union, and so it was quickly canonized in china and became just as popular as in the soviet union. Another side effect of the soviet union's ideology dominating China (See 2004).
Needless to say though some of China’s canon is based on as ethics the vast majority was politically and ideologically influenced and clearly a vectorized Canon.
Translations
Closely related to politics and ideology, translation has had the largest effect on the modern Chinese literary canon. Translation has also had the largest and almost sole effect on canonization of Chinese literature outside of China in the west. The first aspect of translation that affected the Chinese literary canon was the quality of translations. Both Chinese works translated into western languages and western and soviet literature translated into Chinese. If certain Chinese works were translated correctly into another language or skillfully the work had a chance to enter the global canon, though if the translator did a poor job on its translation it had no chance of western canonicity. Also many times especially when western works were translated into Chinese the translators would openly alter the texts from the originals. This was to such a great extent that the famous Chinese writer Mo Yun said that he found more inspiration in the altered texts than the originals. This leads us into the next process of which translation affected china’s canon which was on the translators themselves. As literary authors would translated text they internalized the new western styles and used them in their won writings. Because of the political clime near the May fourth movement Chinese authors writing like westerners where favorably received. This gave rise to fiction writing in the late Qing dynasty. Examples are Lin Shu and Su Manshu both translator who wrote Chinese fiction novels that were heavily influenced by western writing styles. Also originally chinese works began to be reevaluated using new western criticism. Wang Guowei used the western tragic theory to reinterpret the definitive canonical work “The Dream of the Red Chamber (Honglou Meng)”. The influence of western translation lead to canon formations and re-formations (Sun 2008). The need for translation of Chinese works lead to reviewing the Chinese canon and solidified many works because the must be reread and retranslated as put by Trevor Ross:
“A work that endures . . . offers qualities of insight, expression, or beauty that demand repeated readings while resisting complete encapsulation by any one reader,” (Ross 2000).
Many of the classic were complex enough to warrant various translations. Also translations and translators would be affected politically and ideologically. The translation of the communist manifesto in 1920 translated by ChenWangdao had a major effect on Chinese Ideology and canonization. For example after the remarks by Lenin over Mayakovsky’s greatness his works were soon translated in to Chinese. And many of the translators tried to find inspiration in him. A gleaming example is of He Jingzhi who adopted similar writing styles as Mayakovsky after translating him (Sun 2008).
In Mayakovsky’s peom “Vladimir Ilyich Lenin” he follows the following format to honor Lenin:
Lenin!
Lenin!
Lenin!
In He Jingzhi poem “Ode to Lei Feng,” written for a soldier in the People’s Liberation Army who Mao Zedong rallied country to honor, he follows the same exact format and style:
Lei Feng!
Lei Feng!
Lei Feng!
Another interesting outcome of translations and intermingling with western works is that some overrated canonical writers, such as Guo Moruo, Mao Dun, and Zhao Shuli, are subject to revaluation, while writers once ostracized for political reasons, including Shen Congwen, are in various stages of canonization. Infact even the Famous Mayakovsky is now somewhat decanonized after China reviewed his works now no longer influced by the ideology of the fformer Soviet Union (Sun 2008).
Translations of Chinese works and the politics and ideology involved has also had its effects on cross culture canonization. Bei Dao since being translated is more famous in the western world than within china itself. Other examples include Gao Xingjian the recipient of the 2000 Nobel Prize in literature has been seen as a second rate writer within his home county of China (Sun 2008).
Conclusion
While we define today as canon as a work of aesthetics and the most masterful writing of a culture, China’s canon does not adhere to this principle. While there are examples of purely beautiful and breathtaking works of literature and authors who were famous due to pure skill and aesthetics, it is the politics and ideology of China that truly mandated what the literary canon of china was. Weather through translation or the hand of groups and rulers China’s canon has almost always been the reflection of its political and ideological clime.
References
1. Susan Hardy Aiken, “Women and the Question of Canonicity,” College English 48 (1986): 290.
2. Chang, Kang-i Sun, and Stephen Owen. The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
3. R. Fernhout, Canonical Texts: Bearers of Absolute Authority. Bible, Koran, Veda, Tipitaka: A Phenomenological Study (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1994);
4. K.W. Folkert, ‘The “Canons” of “Scripture” ’, in Levering (ed.), Rethinking Scripture, pp. 69-79.
5. Alexander Mikhailov, “At the Feet of a Giant (Arguments surrounding Mayakovsky),” trans. Nancy Tittler, New Literary History 23 (1992): 113.
6. Trevor Ross, “Translation and the Canonical Text,” Studies in the Literary Imagination 33, no. 2 (2000): 1.
7. See Wang Ning, “Canon Formation; or, Literary Revisionism: The Formation of Modern Chinese Literary Canon,” Neohelicon 31 (2004): 161 – 74.
8. Terje Stordalen, The Canonization of Ancient Hebrew and Confucian Literature. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32.1 (2007)
9. Sun Yifeng, Opening the Cultural Mind: Translation and the Modern Chinese Literary Canon. MLQ March 2008
10. http://cul.chinese.cn/en/article/2009-11/30/content_89257.htm
11. The teaching Confucius. Portrait by Wu Daozi, 685-758, Tang Dynasty.
12. http://justynaizadchannel.blogspot.com/2011/01/scha-bathorys-top-10-most-evil-part-2.htm
13. http://www.masterandmargarita.eu/en/07recencies/poezie.html
14. http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/bei-dao