Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary: Reading and Writing Between the Lines 9780804764957

Citation preview

Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary

Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary

Reading and Writing Between the Lines

David L. Rolston

Stanford University Press Stanford, California

Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 1997 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University Publication of this book was underwritten in part by grants from The Office of the Vice President for Research and The Office of the Dean of The College of Literature, Science, and the Arts at the University of Michigan Printed in the United States of America CIP data appear at the end of the book Stanford University Press publications are distributed exclusively by Stanford University Press within the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Central America; they are distributed exclusively by Cambridge University Press throughout the rest of the world.

Contents

Preface Abbreviations

Introduction: Traditional Chinese Fiction Commentary in Context

Vll Xl

1

Part I· A BriefHistory of Chinese Fiction Commentary

1. Mr. Pingdian: Jin Shengtan and the Shuihu zhuan

25

2. Dealing with Jin Shengtan and the Rest of the "Four Masterworks" 3. Decline and Revival

51 85

Part II· Making Room for Fiction

4. Creating Implied Authors and Readers 5. Liberating Fiction from History 6. Liberating Fiction from "Reality"

105 131 166

Part III· From What to Who: The Turn Away from Plot 7. From Plot-Centered to Character-Centered Narratives 8. Relational Characterization and Ambiguous Characters

191 209

Part IV: How to Write the Chinese Novel

9. Fiction Criticism and How the Story Is Told 10. Articulating the Parts

229 243

Vl

Contents Part V.· Four Solutions to the Challenge of Commentary

11. Auto-commentary: The Xiyou bu and the Shuihu houzhuan

269

12. Commentator-Narrators: Li Yu, Ding Yaokang, and Wen Kang 13. Latent Commentary: The Rulin waishi 14. Everything All at Once: The Honglou meng Works Cited Glossary-Index

284 312 329 351 383

Preface

This book addresses a basic fact: for several centuries prior to this one, the Chinese read their fiction in commentary editions. The comments were printed right next to the section of text they referred to. They were not of a merely supplemental nature. The commentators who produced them were trying to reorient (sometimes in quite radical ways) the reading of the fictional works they chose to comment on. Although the fiction commentary tradition in premodern China might not differ in kind from other commentarial traditions around the world, in terms of longevity and influence, it differs a great deal. The ramifications of this unusual tradition, particularly its relationship to fiction composition, have not been fully explored or appreciated. This is partly because the fiction commentary tradition in China was largely scorned or forgotten for the bulk of this century. It is only within the past several decades that real scholarly attention has turned to this native and independent discourse on fiction, but much of the work to date has focused on the help individual commentaries can provide in understanding the works to which they are attached or has remained at the introductory or descriptive level. How to Read the Chinese Novel, which I edited and contributed to, was one such introductory text, even if it was and remains the only comprehensive attempt to introduce this material in English. A very important question has not been addressed: How did the existence of this tradition affect the way people wrote and read fiction in premodern China? In the fifth and final part of this book, four different solutions by authors of fiction in premodern China to the challenge of this commentarial tradition are outlined and examined through specific examples. Ample "introductory" sections prepare the reader for Part V: the Introduction presents a concise summary of the book and contextualizes the Chinese fiction commentary tradition both globally and within traditional Chinese culture. Part I introduces the most important trends and commentators and discusses their mutual influence on each other in the course of surveying

v1u

Preface

the tradition. Part II shows how fiction commentary raised the status of fiction, made it attractive to new readers and writers, and created new discursive space in which fiction could be composed. Part III shows how commentary shifted the attention of both readers and writers from plot to characterization, and Part IV reveals the influence of commentary on how stories were told and structured. A few words of introduction to my system of citation are in order. Works are cited in abbreviated form in order to reduce the bulk of this already overly bulky book. For whatever reader discomfort results from this, I apologize. Works are cited by author name alone, except when this would be ambiguous. Western-language works are preferably cited by author surname alone; in some cases it was necessary to add initials to distinguish authors with the same surname. Chinese and Japanese works are always cited by the author's full name. These two classes of material are listed separately in the bibliography, and this convention should help readers find the correct section quickly. Page citations are designed to give the maximum amount of information in the most concise fashion possible. The final figures in a page citation always refer to the page numbers. Figures preceding the page number and separated from them by a decimal point (typeset works) or a slash (traditional woodblock editions) indicate such things as chapter numbers in the case of fiction or the act number of a play in a play-cycle. Cited comments from jiction commentaries are identified by type (marginal, interlineal), mostly through the use of abbreviations (me, ic). I generally cite recent anthologies, edited typeset editions, and collections of research material in preference to rare original editions for the convenience of the reader, but I have checked these texts for accuracy. One reason for giving full information for the citations, however, is to facilitate finding the cited material in different editions from the one I happened to use. Finally, for the sake of consistency, non-pinyin romanizations of Chinese in quoted material are changed to pinyin throughout (titles are preserved as published, however). My natural inclination is to cite exhaustively and to make the bibliography as complete as possible so that this book, beyond presenting its own particular thesis, would be an accurate and up-to-date reflection of the state of the field. Such a course would also allow me to pay my scholarly debts in full. Although it was perhaps still possible to attempt to do this in How to Read the Chinese Novel, the study of traditional Chinese fiction criticism has since grown too large to fit between the covers of a single volume, and my debts have also increased beyond the point where even partial repayment is feasible. In this volume I have cited only works that for one reason or another offered something specific and citable. The result is that some-

Preface

1x

times works of inferior scholarship representative of some interesting trend are cited, while solid and pathbreaking scholarship of colleagues in China and the West does not necessarily receive, in the pages below, the acknowledgment it truly deserves. This book has its origin in a dissertation started more than a decade ago under the guidance of David Roy, Anthony Yu, and Leo Lee at the University of Chicago. Although the focus and breadth of the project have gone through various permutations since that time, sincere thanks are due to my three dissertation advisors and to the other professors and teachers who put up with me during my graduate education. Since graduation I have been teaching at the University of Michigan among very collegial colleagues, many of whom have read and commented on earlier incarnations of sections of this book. The University itself has been very supportive of my work, granting me a semester off for research and a faculty recognition award, for which I am very grateful. I am also indebted to the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation and the American Council of Learned Societies for a fellowship during which some of the research for this book was done. A fair number of people have read this book in manuscript and sent comments on it to me. Foremost among these are David Roy, who has continued to put more time into the furtherance of my career than I deserve, and Catherine Swatek, of the University of British Columbia, who spent too much of her precious time as a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Michigan reading and marking up my scribblings. Thanks are also due to Andrew H. Plaks of Princeton University, John C. Y. Wang of Stanford University, and Timothy C. Wong, recently returned to the University of Arizona from Ohio State University, for their comments and support. Many, many people in a wide variety of positions in the United States and China deserve to be singled out for their help in getting this book conceived, written, and published. But, precisely because they are so many, I will only single out one to thank here, my wife, Kathryn Rinehart, who has refused public acknowledgment of her many contributions to my work in the past, and to whom I dedicate this book. D.L.R.

Abbreviations

cc

chapter comment (the appended number indicates the number of the item in the comments cited)

df

dufa essay (the appended number indicates the number of the item in the essay cited)

HLM

Cao Xueqin ff~ff and Gao E ~~· Honglou meng ~J: fl Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1982.

~.

HLMJ

Yisu - ~' ed. Honglou meng juan ~J:fl~~. Shanghai: Zhonghua shuju, 1963.

HLMSL

Yisu - ~' ed. Honglou meng shulu ~J:fl~~ ~· Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1981.

HLMZLHB

Zhu Yixuan

7K-;t, ed. Honglou meng ziliao huibian

~J:fl~~;f4#~. Tianjin: Nankai daxue, 1985. lC

interlineal comment

JPMCH

]in Ping Mei cihua :&1flim~ij]§3. Tokyo: Daian, 1963.

JPMZLHB

Hou Zhongyi f*,~~ and Wang Rumei .:Ei:tz:m, eds. ]in Ping Mei ziliao huibian :&tt:lim~;¥4#~. Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1985.

]STQJ

]in Shengtan quanji :&~~~~. 4 vols. Nanjing: Jiangsu guji, 1985.

JSTXXJ

fin Shengtan piben Xixiang ji :&~~1Jt*[Sifll~c. Ed. Zhang Guoguang i].&~:J't. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1986.

JYY

Pingzhu jinyu yuan W-f?i::&.:£~. Taipei: Fenghuang chuban she, 1974.

xu

Abbreviations

Lunzhuxuan

Huang Lin jfft and Han Tongwen .IPJ)(, eds. Zhangguo lidai xiaoshuo lunzhu xuan $1@~{-\tlj\g)tmfB~~- 2 vols. Nanchang: Jiangxi renmin, 1982-85.

me

marginal comment

p

prologue

PPJZLHB

Hou Baipeng 1*8Jm, ed. Pipa ji ziliao huibian :f-E~~c ~r4~~- Beijing: Shumu wenxian, 1989.

RLWSHPB

Li Hanqiu *¥~fj(, ed. Rulin waishi huijiao huiping ben filif*7}sefr&fr~::$:. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1984.

RLWSYJZL

Li Hanqiu *i~fj(, ed. Rulin waishi yanjiu ziliao 7}seti1f~~;f4. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1984.

SGYYHPB

Chen Xizhong ~tBi., Song Xiangrui **~tlM, and Lu Yuchuan ~.=£)II, eds. Sanguo yanyi huiping ben .=-.100 ~~~frW-f::$:. Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1986.

SGYYZLHB

Zhu Yixuan 7K- ~ and Liu Yuchen ~Umtt, eds. San guo yanyi ziliao huibian -=-~~~~~;f4~~- Tianjin: Baihua wenyi, 1983.

SHQZ

Zheng Zhenduo #MiN~, Wu Xiaoling !R:H~n, and Wang Liqi ±5f!J~, eds. Shttihu quanzhuan 7_krnf~{$:. Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1954.

SHZHPB

Chen Xizhong ~tBi., Hou Zhongyi f*,'iS''~' and Lu Yuchuan ~,.=f_J II, eds. Shuihu zhuan huiping ben 7_k?§4=1$ frW-f*· Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1981.

SHZZLHB

Zhu Yixuan 7K- ~ and Liu Yuchen ~UMt1c, eds. Shuihu zhuan ziliao huibian 7_krnf1$Ji;f4~~- Tianjin: Baihua wenyi, 1981.

Stone

David Hawkes and John Minford, trans. The Story of the Stone. 5 vols. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin Books, 1973-86.

XKJPM

XSZMTY

filif*

Qiyan 'Pft~ and [Wang] Rumei ±item, eds. Xinke xiuxiang piping fin Ping Mei ~tUIH1~1JtW-f~#afij. Hong Kong: Sanlian shudian; Ji'nan: Qi Lu shushe, 1990. Ouyang Jian ~~~ and Xiao Xiangkai ififif§1It, eds. Zhongguo tongsu xiaoshuo zongmu tiyao $~JiH{~;j\g)t *!§j=~~- Rev. ed. Beijing: Zhongguo wenlian, 1991.

Abbreviations

xm

XYJZLHB

Zhu Yixuan 7K-~ and Liu Yuchen ~Uintt, eds. Xiyou ji ziliao huibian 1l§:Wf~c~r411t~. Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou shuhua she, 1983.

ZLHC

Sun Xun f-%jl and Sun J uyuan f*1ffi[!J, eds. Zhongguo xiaoshuo meixue ziliao huicui r:f:lm;J\gft~~~r41tf$. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1991.

ZYZ

Chen Qinghao ~-*~1~, ed. Xinbian Shitou ji Zhiyan zhai pingyu jijiao ~~tiEJ{~cg~~~Wf~g,_&f;(. Rev. ed. Beijing: Zhongguo youyi, 1987.

ZZPJPM

Wang Rumei .±.itz:"fij, Li Zhaoxun "$BB'I'fV, and Yu Fengshu -f-)il.mf, eds. Zhang Zhupo piping Diyi qishu ]in Ping Mei ~'rJr:l:,&fJtW:Pm-~-~jfftff~. Rev. ed. Jinan: Qi Lu shushe, 1988.

Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary

Introduction Traditional Chinese Fiction Commentary in Context

Two handy places to add short comments to a traditional Chinese text are the space between the vertical lines (hang) of Chinese characters and the upper margin beyond the solid lines (lan) surrounding the text. However, this appearance of hard and solid boundaries between text and commentary is quite deceiving. When a text with commentary was printed, it was the usual practice to move comments from the upper margin to immediately after the passage to which they refer, where they appeared as doublecolumned small-character interlineal comments. Sometimes mistakes happened-commentary was printed as part of the main text or vice versa. This was not the only place, however, where text and commentary became confused. The lines dividing commentary from text became even more porous in the reader's memory. What happened when readers of fiction in commentary editions turned into writers of fiction? That is one of the things this book will investigate. "Reading between the lines" involves the apprehension of a hidden message in the text. Commentators can lay claim to our attention only by promising to show us something that would otherwise elude us. They are thus as much in the business of reading between the lines as of writing between them. Readers of Chinese fiction commentaries learned from them to read between the lines. When such readers became authors, they tended to "write between the lines" in a figurative sense, although some literally wrote between the lines of their own texts as well. Yet another set of lines dividing one set of things from another was frequently transgressed in fiction commentary and composition in premodern China. These are the lines between author and commentator, author and reader, reader and commentator, and extratextual commentator and narratorial commentator. These pairs could be written with a diagonal slash (author/commentator) to express alternation between the two statuses or with a hyphen to indicate the possibility of a deeper fusion (author-commentator).

2

Introduction

Almost all premodern fiction commentaries are pingdian commentaries. This kind of commentary is concerned less with helping the reader understand the "letter" of the text than with drawing the reader's attention to its notable aspects through emphatic punctuation (quandian-similar to our underlining, italics, or highlighting) and evaluative comments (piping). A pingdian commentary is in essence a record of the commentator's personal reactions. Some were written solely for private use and never circulated publicly. Such commentaries can be interesting for the light they shed on the commentator-witness the recent interest in Mao Zedong's marginalia on philosophical works 1 or the curiosity as to which sentences Stalin underlined in his copy of a biography of Napoleon. 2 The production of a pingdian commentary is also useful to the commentator in that it forces an active dialogue between text and reader and ensures subsequent readings will not begin at ground zero. But the influence of personal, unpublished commentaries is, by their nature, limited. The practice of circulating and publishing pingdian commentary editions of poetry and classical prose dates at least to the Tang dynasty (618-907). From the mid-Ming dynasty (1368-1644), pingdian editions of famous historical works such as Sima Qian's (b. 145 B.C.) Shiji (Records of the historian) and Ban Gu's (32-92) Hanshu (History of the Han dynasty), collections of examination essays, and even the Confucian classics, appeared in ever-increasing numbers (Rolston, "Sources," pp. 10-12, 15-29). All these works were directed at an audience not,.. only of consumers but also of writers or writers-to-be. The pedagogical element is very strong-these works were often addressed to neophyte writers and promised that the key to writing good essays and winning honors in the all-important civil service examinations can be found within their pages. Fiction commentaries began to appear in appreciable numbers in the late Ming, at least partly in response to the popularity and commercial success of pingdian commentaries on works in more respected genres. Some early fiction commentaries were brought out by publishers of other types of pingdian commentaries, and their formats and titles were designed to call to mind commentaries on prestigious texts. In this first stage of fiction commentary, which flourished in the last decades of the sixteenth century, commercial motives dominated. Often the publishers themselves wrote the 1 See Mao Zedong zhexue pizhu ji daolun. A copy of the famous novel Honglou meng (Dream of the red chamber) with Mao Zedong's comments and annotations was reportedly lost in the Cultural Revolution (see Lu Shoujun). Mao Zedong supposedly said: "If you don't put your pen into action, it cannot really be considered reading" (bu dong bimo bu kan shu). See Rolston, "Formal Aspects," p. 42nl. 2 See Dimitri Volkogonov, Stalin: Triumph and Tragedy, trans. Harold Shukman (New York: Grove Weidenfield, 1991), p. 101.

Introduction

3

commentary. These commentaries are quite rudimentary and generally uninspired, but in providing commentary the publishers were equating fiction with more respectable works considered to merit such treatment because of the beauty and complexity of their modes of expression and the depth of their meaning. More sincere advocates of taking fiction seriously, such as Li Zhi (15271602), also chose to compose pingdian commentaries on fiction and drama. Unfortunately, Li Zhi's commentaries have not survived, and we know very little about them. 3 However, in the second stage of fiction commentary production, in approximately the first quarter of the seventeenth century, the market was flooded with bogus Li Zhi commentaries. Most of them were probably written by one man, Ye Zhou (fl. 1595-1624), a frustrated scholar addicted to wine who supposedly met his end at the hands of the husband of a woman he was having an affair with. 4 Whatever their paternity, these "Li Zhi" commentaries spend more time attacking their texts than praising them. They include complaints about everything from implausible plot sequences and poor characterization to improper use of vocabulary and faulty grammar. Sections of the texts are marked off by brackets and accompanied by demands for their excision. A third and critical stage in the development of fiction commentary arose partly in response to complaints made in the previous stage. Active in the last two-thirds of the seventeenth century, the most important commentators in this third stage were Jin Shengtan (1608-61) on the Shuihu zhuan (The water margin; preface dated 1641, edition published 1644), Mao Zonggang (1632-1709 or later) 5 and his father Mao Lun (1605?-1700?) on the Sanguo yanyi (Romance of the three kingdoms; preface 1680), the anonymous commentator on the so-called Chongzhen (1628-44) edition of the fin Ping Mei (Plum in the golden vase) and his successor Zhang Zhupo (1670-98; preface 1695), and Wang Xiangxu (fl. 1605-68) and Huang Zhouxing (1611-80) on the Xiyou ji (The journey to the west; 1663). 6 These commentators took complete responsibility for the texts they were commenting on. When they disagreed with choices made by the original authors or compilers, they changed the texts. They claimed, however, that 3

On the authenticity of extant commentaries attributed to Li Zhi, see Rolston, "Authenticity"; and Plaks, Four Masterworks, pp. 513-17. 4 On Ye Zhou, see Rolston, "Historical Development," pp. 338-39; and "Authenticity." His single extant signed piece of writing is a very brief preface to Xu Zichang's (fl. 1578-1623) ]upu ji (Tale of the orange marshes) in which he compares people to pigs (Cai Zhongxiang, p. 57). 5 Mao Zonggang's date of birth was calculated according to a recently uncovered colophon (ba) dated 1709 (see Chen Xianghua). 6 The preface and edition dates given are for the commentary editions rather than the date of composition or earliest extant edition of the novels themselves.

4

Introduction

their editorial changes were not changes at all but came from an ancient text (guben), accessible only to them, that more accurately reflected the author's original version. These commentators were really commentatoreditors, however they publicly denied it. Another tactic used to remold the texts of these most famous of novels 7 was simply to insist that a section of text meant what they said it meant, all appearances to the contrary. At the same time they passed on their editorial changes amid denials of their own agency, these commentators also claimed that they had completely transformed the texts and their meaning through the application of commentary alone. The transformations of the Shuihu zhuan, San guo yanyi, fin Ping Mei, and Xiyou ji at the hands of these commentator-editors represent attempts to bring older works into accord with newer conceptions of how fiction should be written. Some of the changes were imitated by later writers, with or without knowledge of their true provenance. The commentaries themselves emphasized the rightness of these unacknowledged changes at the same time as they detailed ideas about how fiction should and should not be written, which also influenced later composition. Several questions arise: How prevalent were commentary editions of fiction? How important was the commentary in them? Were the comments actually read? What effect did they have on readers and future writers? The prevalence and importance of commentary editions of fiction can be indicated fairly easily. Commentary editions of famous novels became so popular that earlier editions without commentary or only rudimentary commentary went out of circulation and became rare books, some only to be rediscovered in the twentieth century. Terms came into being to refer to commentaryless editions: baitou ben (Jiang Xingyu, Ming kanben, pp. 173, 214) and baiwen ben (Sun Xun, p. 283). Editions without commentary appeared with titles promising that they contained commentary. It was in the field of fiction that pingdian commentaries reached their most developed form. Some of them were quite weighty in terms of bulk, if not necessarily in terms of quality. The commentary in the Mao edition of the Sanguo yanyi has been estimated to be two-thirds as long as this 120chapter novel itself. Fully developed commentaries include as many as fifteen prefatory essays and charts, chapter comments before or after each chapter (sometimes both), marginal comments above the text, interlineal comments between the lines, and a variety of emphatic punctuation. Although all this material is physically and orthographically distinguished 7 These four, in a formulation first attributed to Feng Menglong (1574-1646) in Li Yu's 1680 preface to the Mao commentary on the Sanguo yanyi, were known as the si da qishu (four great marvelous books). Andrew Plaks (Four Masterworks) has argued that these four constitute the core of a new genre of literati novel that matured in the sixteenth century.

Introduction

5

from the text proper and thus theoretically ignorable by the reader, it is hard to conceive of a reader who would be totally immune to such an assault.8 Were writers of fiction also readers of fiction, and more particularly, readers of commentary editions? Like many traditional Chinese literary genres, where references to other members of the same genre is common practice, Chinese fiction alludes frequently to other works of fiction. Although this runs the gamut from "plagiarism" to "subtle transformation," it argues for a certain familiarity with the competition to be gained only by first-hand knowledge through reading. The teaching of writing in traditional China, as well as many arts and crafts, made heavy use of the imitation of approved examples by the student. In Ming-Qing China, it became increasingly difficult to find copies of famous works of fiction without commentary. There is also much that proves the commentary itself was taken seriously. Later commentators implicitly or explicitly compare their work to that of earlier commentators. There are numerous examples of commentary editions reprinted with added commentary, the bulk of which addresses the original commentary rather than the text. There are prefaces for new works claiming superiority over older ones, where it is clear that commentary editions of those works are meant. Many of the sequels written to famous novels are clearly written in agreement or opposition to the interpretation of the original works put forward in commentary editions. If the writing and reading of fiction commentaries was as prevalent and as important as I have tried to indicate, why have most accounts of the development of fiction in China ignored them until quite recently? I think it was precisely the effectiveness of these commentaries at selling their own points of view that partially caused their downfall. Advocates of vernacular Chinese who promoted traditional novels as linguistic models, such as Hu Shi (1891-1962) and Qian Xuantong (1887-1939), were opposed to the commentaries (which were written in literary Chinese) because they stood in the way of their attempts to appropriate these novels for their own purposes. Reformers more interested in politics than Hu Shi claimed to be, such as Liang Qichao (1873-1929) and Lu Xun (1881-1936), objected to the general conservatism of most commentators, and most everybody claimed the commentaries smelled of the hated eight-legged examination essays. The most famous of the commentators, Jin Shengtan, got caught in the middle of an argument between Lu Xun and Lin Yutang (1895-1976) over the value of traditional literati aesthetics, and was consequently the unwar-

8 According to one modern scholar, "Once having read the Maos' reading Sanguo zhi yanyi, it is virtually impossible to discard their raft: it remains with you, carrying you along with it, half-protestingly, half enthralled" (Bailey, p. 260).

Introduction

6

ranted target of Lu Xun's famous barbed pen in several essays mistaken for literary criticism until fairly recently (see Xu Tao). The supposed uniqueness of the idea of reading fiction embedded in layers of commentary (see next section) also surely counted against traditional fiction commentaries in the eyes of reformers with some knowledge of Western fiction and its criticism. It must also be conceded that there are some oddballs in the ranks of Chinese fiction commentators, and even the best of them lack qualities we have tended to demand from literary critics for most of the twentieth century. 9 On the other hand, the search for socialism with Chinese characteristics in reform-era China has brought with it the idea of looking to traditional fiction criticism for a theory of the novel with Chinese characteristics, and this has brought considerable scholarly attention to bear on certain traditional fiction commentators. However, little has been said on how reading and writing commentary editions of fiction affected the production of new works. 10 The same is basically true for scholars in Taiwan and the West, with the exception of Ellen Widmer and her book on one of the sequels to the Shuihu zhuan, the Shuihu houzhuan (Continuation of the Shuihu zhuan)Y While her book is an excellent case study, it does not address some of the broader issues of concern in this book. Commentary editions of fiction opened up a variety of new possibilities for fiction composition. Some fiction commentators usurped the role of author. Some fiction authors wrote their own commentaries so as to add another layer of discourse to their texts and perhaps prevent them from being appropriated by later commentators. Some authors created storytellernarrators modeled in part on the voice and predilections of famous fiction commentators; still other authors downplayed the role of the traditional oral-storyteller narrator, thus allowing for a less mediated contact between the created world of the fiction and the reader and leaving space for the reader to fill in an unexpressed but latent commentary hinted at by the author. The main problem for the famous commentators of the third stage was to find or create clear and consistent authors for their texts, most of which 9 For a sustained attack on Jin Shengtan for failing to measure up to modern standards of literary criticism, see Chen Xiang' s four-pan article. 1 For remarks on this subject, see Chen Hong, Lilun shi, pp. 189-90 (see also Wang Dajin's preface, p. 2); Lu Decai, Xiaoshuo yishu lun, pp. 149-50, 153; Liu Hui, "Cong cihua ben," p. 38; Mu Hui, pp. 34-35; Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 88, 296, 300, 309, 363, and 443-44; Zhou Qizhi et al., pp. 10-11, 318; and Chen Huijuan, p. 309. For Chinese critics on the influence of fiction commentators on the Honglou meng, see Chapter 14 below. 11 Robert E. Hegel has paid attention to the influence of commentators on fiction for some time now, but his published comments on the subject have been rather brief. See, e.g., his "Aesthetics," p. 157: and Novel, p. 227.

°

Introduction

7

had reached their complex state through a process of accretion involving many authors and compilers. 12 Even in the case of the fin Ping Mei, now generally regarded as the work of a single author, because that author is known only by a pseudonym and welded his novel out of disparate elements from a variety of literary works and genres, 13 the ordinary reader has had a hard time visualizing the author or understanding what he was about. 14 The original form of the fin Ping Mei, the so-called cihua version, was soon replaced by a heavily edited and more streamlined version, the socalled Chongzhen version. Readers in China from at least the time of Mencius (372-289 B.C.) have seen the written text as the main vehicle for access to the worthies of old. For them, proper understanding entailed putting yourself in the author's shoes or visualizing the author as you read. Sima Qian, for instance, at the end of his biography of Confucius, described how he tried to visualize Confucius himself whenever he read the classics. 15 This approach to reading was first explicitly discussed in the Mencius in language continually employed by later scholars and readers: yi yi ni zhi (use your imagination to recapture the author's original intention), or fun [qi] shi (historicize). 16 Liu Xie (465?-520?) provided an eloquent description of the process in "Zhiyin" (The one who knows the tone), the 48th chapter of his Wenxin diaolong (The literary mind: Dragon carvings). The second-stage fiction commentators approached the problem of the missing or hard to visualize author by attacking the text and, by implication, the deficiencies of the author. They called for revisions and showed little interest in building up the status of the author or encouraging the reader to commune with or visualize him. Referring to their authors, they use vague terms such as "author" (zuozhe) instead of the names of the men to whom their texts were traditionally attributed. The personalities of the commentators, most of whom pretended to be that famous iconoclast Li Zhi, overshadow the authors in these commentary editions. 12 On the early textual development of the four most famous novels, see Plaks, Four Masterworks. On the creation of implied authors (and readers), see Chapter 4 below. 13 The most efficient way to see this aspect of the fin Ping Mei is to skim the annotations in Roy, Plum. See also Rolston, "Oral Performing Literature," pp. 14-52. H Witness the extreme disparity in traditional and modern evaluations of this novel, which range from condemnation of it as pornography or a work of low culture from a low mind to lavish praise of it as a work of genius. 15 Sima Qian, 47.1947. The passage is translated by H. Yang and G. Yang, Records of the Historian, p. 27: "When I read the works of Confucius, I try to see the man himself. In LuI visited his temple and saw his carriage, clothes and sacrificial vessels. Scholars go regularly to study ceremony there, and I found it hard to tear myself away." 16 Mencius VA.4 and VB.8 (for translations, see Lau, pp. 142, 158). On these two terms in literary criticism, see Liu Dexuan.

8

Introduction

The commentators of the third stage were blessed with no small egos either, but having edited their texts to bring them more in line with how they would have written them and having attributed those changes to the authors themselves, they took further steps to make their texts the products of a consistent and somewhat dramatized implied author and thus easier to read. For instance, Jin Shengtan made use of the potentially confusing situation of inheriting two candidates for the authorship of the Shuihu zhuan by turning Shi Nai'an 17 into the author of his revised text and Luo Guanzhong (fl. 1330-1400) into the misguided author of those parts of the received text that he left out of his own edition. He always referred to Shi Nai'an by name, worked the author's name into the title of his edition, frequently described him at work writing the novel, and presented the reader with a forged preface in which we can supposedly hear his unmediated voice. The other third-stage commentators took similar steps: Zhang Zhupo presented the author of the fin Ping Mei as a frustrated filial son with a bellyful of resentment against a world that mistreated him, failed to recognize his talent, and forced him to write the fin Ping Mei as the only way to relieve his resentment. Wang Xiangxu and Huang Zhouxing claimed that the famous Yuan dynasty Daoist patriarch Qiu Changchun (ming Chuji, 11481227) was the author of the Xiyou ji. They forged a preface by one of Qiu's younger contemporaries as evidence and included a biography of Qiu Changchun in their edition of the nolfel. The Maos are perhaps the exception here, but their approach is related. The Sanguo yanyi is a work of historical fiction, and they tried to raise the prestige of their text by taking the true author of it to be not the man given credit for it on the title page, Luo Guanzhong, but the Creator of All Things (Zaowuzhe), whom they credit not only for the historical Three Kingdoms period itself but also for the patterns of meaning and intelligibility they found in the novel. There are several important points to be noticed here. The provision of consistent and concrete implied authors surely made these works easier to read for traditional Chinese readers, but it also facilitated taking the hitherto little respected "outlaw" genre of vernacular fiction more seriously. Two things were accomplished-the status of fiction was raised, and encouraging people to identify themselves with dramatized images of fiction authors made it easier for them to conceive of themselves sitting down to write fiction. Commentators typically present their works as models to be 17

Opinion is divided whether such a person ever existed or whether the name is only a made-up pseudonym. The idea that twentieth-century discoveries in Jiangsu province prove his existence has not been generally accepted. For representative negative and positive assessments of the evidence, see Liu Shide, "Shi Nai'an"; and the journal of the Society for the Study of Shi Nai'an, Shi Nai'an yanjiu xuekan, respectively.

Introduction

9

emulated and passed off their endeavors as basically pedagogical-You too can write a great work of fiction! Or, failing that, you can at least write a commentary on a pre-existing novel, an act Zhang Zhupo emphatically held to be equivalent to composing a new novel in terms of difficulty and scale. 18 Zhang Zhupo was also particularly explicit in his description of the act of reading as a re-creation of the text in which the reader should go back and independently make all the decisions made by the author during the original creation of the text (see JPMZLHB 35, df 41-42; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 224). Many third-stage commentators not only took their own advice and identified themselves with the authors of their novels, they actually patterned their projections of the authors on themselves. This is especially true in the case of Jin Shengtan and Zhang Zhupo. But authors of new fiction now had a way to protect their works at least partially from such appropriation by commentators-they could write their own prefaces and commentaries or enlist close friends to do it for them (see Chapters 11 and 14). These commentaries could be quite rudimentary, but the auto-commentaries provided by Chen Chen (1614-after 1666) for his Shuihu houzhuan and by Dong Yue (1620-86) and his father, Dong Sizhang (d. 1628), for their Xiyou bu (Supplement to the Xiyou ji) are much more complex. Chen Chen ascribed the authorship of his novel to a Song dynasty (960-1279) loyalist (Gu Song yimin) living in the Yuan dynasty (1279-1368). He created a commentary for the novel under one of his own pen names, but backdated the commentary and the commentator's supposed finding of this old text (guben) to a time before Chen Chen himself was born. As Ellen Widmer has shown, Chen Chen made use of this extra commentarial voice to undercut the achievement of a kind of utopia in the narrated world of his novel by bringing the reader's attention back to the less than perfect world that prompted the writing of the novel (Widmer, Margins, pp. 109-56). The authors of the Xiyou bu did not create a separate persona for their commentary, but they made use of the security against complete misinterpretation afforded by their extratextual commentary to make radical experiments with the way that stories were traditionally told in vernacular fiction. In their work, the "guiding function" of the narrator as storyteller that dominates early vernacular fiction was transferred to extratextual commentary. For the Xiyou bu to work as intended, it is important that the reader personally experience with as little mediation as possible the main character's bewilderment and eventual enlightenment in an allegorized world of desire. The commentary is available to the reader, but it is less in-

18 See his prefatory essay, "Zhupo xianhua" (Idle talk from Zhang Zhupo), JPMZLHB 11 (Roy, "Chang Chu-p'o's Commentary," p. 119).

10

Introduction

trusive than having the narrator explicitly guide the reader through the story. This shutting off of narratorial intrusion also appears in novels without auto-commentary, such as Wu Jingzi's (1701-54) Rulin waishi (The scholars; preface dated 1736). In these texts the commentary is left for readers to provide for themselves, using as models other fiction commentaries and the ability to recognize subtle clues learned from reading those commentaries. This was not an "anything goes" type of situation-the authors seem to have had a very definite idea of how the commentary should be written, even though they preferred to leave it in a latent state to be actualized by the reader (see Chapter 13). In this line of development, not only does narratorial commentary become less prominent, so does the use of generalized descriptive set-pieces in parallel prose, another characteristic of early vernacular fiction. Intrusive poetry and generalized descriptive passages bothered some of the earliest fiction commentators. In some first-stage commentary editions, poetry was deleted or moved up to the upper margin. Second-stage commentators frequently complained about this kind of material and marked it for excision, but it was third-stage commentators who actually eliminated large quantities of it from their editions. Most radical of all was Jin Shengtan, whose edition of the Shuihu zhuan, with the exception of the opening and closing poems (the latter of which he composed himselQ, is completely lacking in examples of intrusive poetry or descriptive set* pteces. Another way of accommodating new novels to the practice of reading commentary editions of fiction was to create narrators with some of the voice and tone of the extratextual commentators (see Chapter 12). The oldstyle narrators were impersonal and pretended that they were telling the story orally. The new narrators are more personalized, make heavy use of irony, employ cute or ironic figures of speech, call attention to the written and fabricated nature of their text, compare it to other works and its characters to other fictional and historical characters, and point out unusual or laudable features of the way their story is told-all these are characteristic of the second- and third-stage commentators but not of the old-style narrators. The narrators in Ling Mengchu's (1580-1644) and Li Yu's (1611-80) fiction tend to take this form, but elements of this development are also quite prominent in later works such as Wen Kang's Ernu yingxiong zhuan (Tales of heroic lovers; ca. 1850) and the anonymous ]i Gong quanzhuan (Complete story of monk Jidian; preface 1668). Sometimes the structural peculiarities of commentary are imitated in the text of later novels. The anonymous Lin Lan Xiang (earliest extant edition dated 1838) begins with an expository section explaining the title of the novel reminiscent of the first item in Zhang Zhupo's dufa (how to read) essay for the fin Ping Mei.

Introduction

11

Almost every chapter of Yuan Yuling's (1599-1674) Suishi yiwen (Forgotten tales of the Sui; preface 1633) and Chu Renhuo's (1635-ca. 1705) Sui Tang yanyi (Romance of the Sui and Tang; 1695 preface) begins with introductory narratorial comments that resemble the pre-chapter comments in the major third-stage commentaries. That most complicated of texts, Cao Xueqin's (1715?-63?) Honglou meng (a.k.a., Shitou ji or The story of the stone; first printed edition 1791-92), contains in one work examples of most of the transformations and transgressions mentioned above (see Chapter 14). Most versions of the novel begin with the quotation of the author's explanation of why he wrote the work, an example of commentary making its way into the text. 19 Other features of the traditional novel, such as chapter-opening poems, tend to appear not in the text but in pre-chapter comments. One early commentator, Jihu sou ("Odd Tablet"), ordered the author to delete against his will the description of the death of one of the characters, Qin Keqing (see Chapter 14). A fellow commentator, Zhiyan zhai ("Red Inkstone"), had his name written into the text of an early manuscript version of the novel (Zhiyan zhai, 1/8b; Stone, 1: 51) and into the titles of almost all of the others, and otherwise actively collaborated in the composition, production, and dissemination of the novel. On occasion he and Jihu sou confuse themselves with the characters in the novel. The author, Cao Xueqin, is commonly held to be the author of at least some of the comments in the early manuscript versions, and he made use of both the unobtrusive narrator of the Rulin waishi type and the personalized narrator of the Li Yu type. He generally avoided the use of intrusive poetry or descriptive passages but made excellent use of the examples that do occur in his novel. Zhiyan zhai would have you think that the Honglou meng was a work of genius created out of nothing and without parallel in the past. I will be more concerned to show how Chinese fiction as a whole was affected by the practice of writing extratextual commentary and the variety of ways that writers responded to its challenge. By doing this, I hope to show that even works of genius come from somewhere and, more specifically, that some of those works of genius were reacting to an important tradition almost forgotten for most of the twentieth century. Is the Chinese Tradition Unique? Recent interest in China in traditional pingdian commentaries on fiction has its elements of cultural chauvinism. After decades of neglect, perhaps colored by embarrassment over their very existence, scholars are now try19 See Chapter 14. In Stone, this passage has been returned to the realm of commentary and most of it is translated in the introduction to vol. 1 (pp. 20-21).

12

Introduction

ing to drum up interest by claiming for them a unique status among world literary traditions. The uniqueness is said to reside in either the pingdian type of commentary in general or in its application to fiction specifically. 20 These claims are never backed up by serious comparative study, but rather than reject them out of hand or accept them at face value, let us take a look at the problem. Although traditional fiction criticism in China was written in a wide variety of generic forms ranging from random notes (biji) to, near the very end of the tradition, independent essays, in terms of bulk and influence, it is the commentary tradition that stands out. 21 The word commentary has many meanings, but in this book it refers primarily to sets of comments physically resident within the texts commented on but distinguished from them by orthography or placement. 22 Commentaries are usually reserved for the kind of texts that civilizations anchor themselves to and consider most worth fighting over. These are most likely members of scriptural or cultural canons, such as the Bible in the West and the Confucian classics in China. The idea of adapting scriptural commentary to works of literature, and works of fiction at that, represents somewhat of a leap. In the West the leap was made easier by the fact that certain Greek and Roman literary works (Virgil's Aenead, for instance),23 found their way into the canon and received commentarial attention. Even though the goal of much of that attention was to appropriate 20 Pingdian style commentaries on fiction are said to be rare or nonexistent in other countries, see Fan Shengtian, p. 5 {Ning Zongyi preface); Fang Zhengyao, Xiaoshuo piping, pp. 4-5 (Guo Yushi preface); and Zhou Qizhi et al., p. 314. 21 A list of sources for traditional Chinese fiction criticism in Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 9-14, mentions: (1) prefaces and postfaces (xuba), (2) commentary (pingdian), (3) random notes (biji), (4) works of fiction (xiaoshuo), particularly the opening chapters of novels, (5) bibliographies (mulu), (6) historiography (shilun), (7) poetics (shilun), and (8) independent essays (zhuanti lunwen). 22 Many self-described commentaries in China and the West do not contain the full text of the work commented upon. Examples of pingdian commentaries of fiction without the text of the commented work or with minimal cues exist, but represent themselves as expedient solutions given the cost of printing the whole work. For examples, see Rolston, "Formal Aspects," pp. 66-67. 23 Readily accessible examples of medieval commentary on the Aenead include an allegorical commentary in Latin of the twelfth century, The Commentary on the First Six Books of the Aenead by Vergil, Commonly Attributed to Bernadus Silvestris, trans. Julian Ward Jones and Elizabeth Frances Jones (Lincoln: Nebraska University Press, 1977); and John Harrington's 1604 English translation with commentary, The Sixth Book of Virgil's ''Aeneid," ed. Simon Cauchi (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991). In the latter, the original Latin, with marginal glosses keyed to it, fills the recto pages, and the translation appears on the verso pages. This commentary survived only in two manuscript copies until recently. For a description of a very early commentary commonly ascribed to Servius Qate fourth c.) and a photoreprint of one of its pages, see Morse, pp. 24-26.

Introduction

13

them for "Christian" uses through allegorical interpretation, there was also substantial interest in the appreciation and mastery of their rhetoric. When medieval writers started writing in the vernacular instead of Latin, they tried to appropriate some of the power and prestige of the classical tradition by providing commentary for their own works. 24 Some scholars think that for a time "new readers may have expected secular authors to annotate their own works. "25 In China, the application of commentary to vernacular fiction was also motivated by a desire to raise the prestige of a fairly new and unrecognized form of literature. In the West, printing seems to have been instrumental in the extinction of the old-style commentaries with their marginal glosses at the same time that it facilitated a new mode of commentary, the footnote. 26 Whereas the old glosses were concerned with identifying sources and rhetorical techniques, footnotes were part of a new mode of scholarship interested in attempting to review all known sources of information. 27 Although marginal glosses could be printed as footnotes, 28 many scholars see the two forms as inherently different. In this view, the marginal glosses were products of a basically oral culture that, although it made use of texts, tended to read them out loud. Part of the function of the glosses was to render undivided and lightly or unpunctuated texts usable to oral as opposed to silent readers. The language of footnotes, according to Hugh Kenner, "has forsaken a vocal milieu, and a context of oral communication between persons, and 2 • Dante is the real innovator here. His first major work, Vita Nuova, was accompanied by his own commentary, as was his Convivio (Minnis and Scott, pp. 373-76). His admirer Boccaccio followed suit in one manuscript of his Teseida (see Hollander), and John Gower (ca. 13301408) wrote a Latin commentary for his Middle English Confessio Amantis (Minnis and Scott, pp. 379-80). 25 Schibanoff, p. 92. According to her, half the extant complete manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales have anonymous glosses or marginal annotations, and some scholars think that those on the Ellesmere manuscript are by Chaucer himself (ibid., pp. 71, 91-92). According to A. C. Hamilton, after the appearance of other works with elaborate commentary, Spenser "had no choice but to publish his Shephearde's Calendar with the annotations by E.K. Only in this way could his poem achieve the appearance of an 'instant classic'" (p. 136). 26 In the case of The Canterbury Tales, the earliest extant printed edition reproduces none of the marginal glosses. They reappear in transformed form in Thomas Speght's 1598 edition, but by 1617 commentary was no longer printed along with the text (Schibanoff, p. 107 and n80). Chinese "emphatic punctuation" (quandian) also had analogues in punctuation practice in the premodern Western world (see, e.g., Isidore of Seville's [ca. 560-636] list of types of punctuation), but these also disappeared fairly soon after printing became the dominant mode of textual production. 27 See Lipking, p. 625, and n2. Frank Palmeri describes the change as the giving way of "the complementary relation between text and gloss ... to an antagonistic relation between the text and the limited, partial, or mistaken authorities it refers to in its notes" (p. 247). 28 E.g., eighteenth-century editions of Thomas Burnet's {1635?-1715) works (Lipking, p. 625n1).

14

Introduction

commenced to take advantage of the expressive possibilities of technological space." 29 More important, perhaps, is the fact that we employ different modes of reading with marginal glosses versus footnotes: "Footnotes can be ignored, at discretion; marginal glosses always cry for attention and threaten to split the experience of reading asunder" (Lipking, p. 640). In China, on the other hand, printing was invented in the Tang dynasty long before the true flowering of vernacular fiction. In traditional China, there was no contrast between manuscript forms of commentary (marginal glosses, etc.) and forms associated with printing (footnotes). Manuscript and printed versions of commentaries in China are often, for all intents and purposes, identical. Although movable type had long been an option, preference was always given to xylography, which used manuscript copies of the text pasted reverse side up as guides for the woodblock carvers. 30 Resistance to footnotes continues in China even today, as does the idea that they are roughly equivalent to marginal glosses and interlineal comments (witness the reprinting of traditional interlineal and marginal commentary as endnotes). The West is polyglot, and translations with commentary loom large in its commentarial tradition. Translations of fiction with commentary in the West range from editions of ancient Greek novels 31 to traditional Chinese novels. 32 Commentary editions of literary works in archaic English or classical languages continue to be produced today. China was more resistant to foreign languages-the only major linguistic incursion before the modern onslaught from the West was the introduction of Buddhist literature from India and Central Asia. Although Buddhist scripture includes passages of narrative and even some narrative genres (such as the Jataka tales), literary works from India were not translated into Chinese until quite recently. There were elements in early modern culture in the West hostile to tra-

29 Hugh Kenner, Flaubert, Joyce, and Beckett: The Stoic Comedians (London: W. H. Allen, 1964), p. 40. 30 Medieval text production methods in the West were quite limiting in comparison: because of the expense of paper and parchment, texts were first composed on reusable wax tablets with space for only two pages of writing; once all revision was finished, the text was recopied onto the running manuscript. See Paul Saenger, "Silent Reading: Its Impact on Late Medieval Script and Society," Viator 13 (1982): 367-414, esp. p. 385. 31 The first printed edition of Chaereas and Callirrhoe in 1750 contained, along with the original text, a Latin translation and a commentary that "remains the most detailed ever bestowed on a Greek novel" (Tomas Hagg, The Novel in Antiquity [Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983], p. 211). 32 Thomas Percy's (1729-1811) translation (actually more of a summary) of the Haoqiu zhuan as The Fortunate Union (2d ed., 1761) contains elaborate cultural notes (Wang Lina, pp. 313, 317-18). Later translations, such as that of F. W. Baller, include the original Chinese and extensive notes (ibid., p. 319).

Introduction

15

ditional commentarial practice. 33 Some of that hostility persists and is no doubt responsible for the relative neglect of the phenomenon in general and of its influence on Renaissance scholarship and thought in particular. 34 According to one scholar, the printers of early editions (1478 and 1532) of The Canterbury Tales "appear to realize that the gloss has no place in the new book, a work designed for private reading," and "after Speght [and his edition of 1598] reading instructions soon disappear again from the margins of printed secular works, which . . . are hostile to such overt and direct regulation of reading" (Schibanoff, p. 107 and n80). This surely explains why, with some exceptions, early modern and modern authors using marginal glosses tend to either parody the practice or engage in it with tongue firmly in cheek. 35 A good example is the "Night Lessons" chapter (book 2, chap. 2) of Joyce's Finnegans Wake, which employs marginal glosses in italics and small capitals in the left- and right-hand margins, respectively, and footnotes below. All three of these modes of commentary represent, at any one time, three different perspectives on the main text. 36 Postmodernism, with its accent on discontinuity, multiplicity of voices, and irony, has revived the use of marginal glosses and experimented with footnotes, not so much in literary works as in works of literary criticism and philosophy. 37

33 See, e.g., Cervantes's feigned lament that his Don Quixote lacks marginal glosses and the facetious solution offered by his "friend" in the prologue to that novel. 3 ~ On the need for revising both the accepted view that the Western commentary tradition contains nothing of interest to historians of literary criticism and theory and the idea that there is a radical break between medieval and Renaissance approaches to texts, see Minnis and Scott, pp. 5, 11. On the neglect of the glosses to The Canterbury Tales, see Schibanoff, p. 71. 35 This is less true with footnotes than with glosses. Examples in which the footnotes are merely an extension of the narratorial persona include Fielding's Tom Jones, and some of Stendahl's and S. S. Van Dine's novels {see Benstock). 36 For a reading, with commentary, of its opening sections, see Lipking, pp. 651-55. 37 Derrida is the most prominent example. In his "Living On" {1979), a single running footnote accompanies the main text and plays in counterpoint to it. The introduction to his Marge de La philosophie (1972) has a continuous marginal gloss by Michel Leiris, and his Glas {1974) consists of two running columns of text, one concerned with Hegel and the other with Jean Genet. The work most often compared to Chinese pingdian commentaries, Barthes's S/Z, certainly fragments and interrupts the text as Chinese fiction commentaries do. For comparisons of the two, see Widmer, Margins, p. 256n62; Rolston, "Formal Aspects," p. 50n23; Bailey, pp. 256-58; and Hua Laura Wu, pp. 50n50, 221-24. We might also mention the fairly recent trend of producing luxury editions with marginal annotation of such "classics" as Dracula and Alice in Wonderland. The most interesting of these is Peter F. Neumeyer's 1994 annotated edition of E. B. White's Charlotte's Web! A more lighthearted approach can be found in Mitsumasa Anno's Anno's Aesop: A Book of Fables by Aesop and Mr. Fox {New York: Orchard Books, 1989), which contains illustrated selections from Aesop's Fables with added oral commentary by the illiterate Mr. Fox, who makes up stories from the pictures for his son while pretending to be reading to him. A similarly skeptical {if less forgiving) attitude toward commentary can be seen in Nabokov's Pale Fire.

16

Introduction

Two interesting examples of more straightforward uses of marginal glosses since the Renaissance in the West are Thomas Gray's 1768 version of his "Progress of Poesy," and the 1817 Sibylline Leaves version of Coleridge's "The Ancient Mariner." Both appeared some time after the first publication of the poems involved (1757 and 1798, respectively), and include extensive commentary designed to help readers accept works that had, in their earlier versions, struck many as obscure and disunified. 38 Although auto-commentaries on fictional works do exist in China (see Chapter 11), they neither dominate the early attempts to adapt classical commentary to fiction in the vernacular nor do they loom as large in the tradition as a whole. Self-commentary in the West could be either serious or parodic, but as self-indulgent as some of the Chinese commentators are, there are no real examples of parody. Serious auto-commentary is a ticklish business; it is easy to fall into embarrassing self-praise, which tends to put off modern readers when they encounter it in Chinese examples. Not openly acknowledging self-commentary as one's own handiwork might have been felt to provide an ample enough "fig leaf" to hide behind. In any case, the fulsomeness of the self-praise in auto-commentaries in Chinese fiction is generally unmatched in Western examples, although the congratulatory letters that Richardson included as prefatory material to his novels are as obnoxious. 39 In his analysis of the Western commentarial tradition, Lawrence Lipking has posited the existence of two poles, marginalia and marginal gloss (pp. 609, 612, 651). He takes as emblematic of the contrast between them Poe's Marginalia and Valery's marginal comments to his 1927 translation of it into French. Poe printed his marginalia divorced from their original "contexts" and in his introduction said: "Nonsense is the essential sense of the Marginal Note." Valery omitted this statement in his translation (p. 609). According to Lipking, Poe was the first to publish his marginalia, and he suggests that only the Romantic fascination with the fragmentary made the publication possible (p. 612). Lipking argues that marginalia enjoy a certain freedom of subject and tone as well as independence from the text whose margins it (originally) inhabited. Marginal glosses, on the other hand, are serious, dependent on the text, and aim at a higher synthesis. The ideal, according to Lipking, would be a style that synthesizes the two (p. 651). Syn-

38 See Lipking, pp. 613-21, 628. Even Coleridge, however, did not take the idea of marginal glossing overly seriously. Both the poem and the glosses are pastiches (ibid., pp. 621-22). 39 See the letters and abstracts from letters included in the first two editions {1740 and 1741) of his first novel, Pamela, reprinted in loan Williams, ed., Novel and Romance, 1700-1800: A Documentary Record (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1970), pp. 93-115 {see also the editor's comments, p. 8).

Introduction

17

thesized or not, Chinese fiction commentary almost always contains a mix- ture of marginalia and marginal gloss thus defined. Some of the features of traditional Chinese fiction commentary that might seem odd or unique at first, such as later commentators attacking earlier commentators, commentators privileging themselves over both text and original author, and commentators insisting on justifying the whole enterprise as pedagogic, are easy enough to find in the Western commentarial tradition. 40 In the end, what elements of "uniqueness" are we left with? The major difference is surely that the medieval tradition of commentary in the West ran out of steam long before the Chinese one, and later writers drew upon it only occasionally and predominantly in a satirical mode. It is the goal of this book to show the consequences (for good and ill) of the more robust commentarial tradition on fiction in China. Commentarial Culture in Late Imperial China Writing commentaries was such a common practice among intellectuals in premodern China that portrayals of it abound in fictional and nonfictional works. The first attempt to represent the full scope of intellectual life is the Shishuo xinyu (A new account of tales of the world), a collection of anecdotes in literary Chinese by Liu Yiqing (403-44). The first ten items in its chapter on literature and scholarship focus on the writing of commentaries.41 In the Rulin waishi, another attempt to get the world of the Chinese intellectual down on paper but this time in the vernacular, characters compose and discuss a variety of commentaries, from ones on the classics to pingdian collections of examination essays. 42 Also pictured in the Rulin waishi is the procedure of marking up com-

°

4 Chinese instances are discussed in various chapters below. Ruth Morse gives examples of Western commentaries attracting commentaries (pp. 26-27) and discusses how scholastic commentators won out over the texts to which they presumably were subservient (p. 32). Blake's "famous marginalia on Reynolds" has been described as an attempt "to seize Reynold's book physically, convert it, and make it aware of Blake's vision" (Lipking, p. 612). Traditional commentators pointed out rhetorical figures for emulation and later use (a commentator on the Aeneid said "Indeed, anyone who imitates these matters diligently will attain the greatest skill in the art of writing"; Morse, p. 31), and modern authors of manuals on fiction marked up model texts with signs and symbols and marginal comments (e.g., Thomas H. Uzzel with Camelia Waite Uzzel, Narrative Technique: A Practical Course in Literary Psychology, rev. ed. [New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1934], "Appendix C: A Notable Short Story Analyzed," pp. 451-59). 41 See Liu Yiqing, 4.103-8 {Mather, pp. 92-97). The Shishuo xinyu itself is always read in editions with Liu Jun's {462-521) extensive commentary. 42 For examples of the former, see RLWSHPB 34.467-69, 35.486, and 48.647. Ma Chunshang and other characters earn their living publishing collections of model examination essays with commentary.

18

Introduction

positions with emphatic punctuation and comments so fundamental to traditional Chinese pedagogy (RLWSHPB 15.218). Chinese texts normally circulated without punctuation or paragraphing; careful reading usually involved the addition by the reader of at least minimal punctuation and section markers. Marking up the text in this way could serve as a test of the student's comprehension of the original 43 or might be done by the teacher as a convenience for the student. 44 The examiners for the civil service examinations treated the test essays the same way, adding punctuation and evaluative comments. 45 Writing commentary was also a social practice, something done for friends and acquaintances. 46 Commenting on others' work took place across a wide range of activities stretching from writing colophons on paintings 47 to composing parallel couplets (duilian) and poems to grace interior or garden views, 48 or even the wonders of nature at large. 49 This interest in adding words to texts or scenes, and the kind of doubleness of vision entailed, is paralleled in publishing history by the practice of dividing pages into upper and lower registers and printing entirely unrelated narratives in each half, so that any one page presents segments of two or more texts. This arrangement was used frequently in the "miscellanies" of the late Ming and early Qing such as Yanju biji and Guose tianxiang, but also figures in the printing of arias from other plays in the upper registers of playscripts 50 and literary-language fiction in one register and vernacular 43 For instance, the philosopher Cheng Hao (1032-85) as district magistrate personally corrected the punctuation in the books of local schoolchildren (Zhu Xi and Lii Zuqian, 9/7b, item 6; W. Chan, Reflections, p. 225). 44 Chengshi jiashu dushu fennian richeng (Mr. Cheng's study itinerary fo; use in private schools) by Cheng Duanli of the Yuan dynasty (1279-1368) gives instructions on how to mark up texts (see, e.g., 3/20b, 3/27a-28b). 45 A character in the Qilu deng (Warning light at the crossroads; author's preface 1777) knows precisely where his essay offended the examiner because the examiner's punctuation comes to a halt at that point (Li Liiyuan, 10.112). 46 For instance, in story 12 in Feng Menglong, Xingshi hengyan, 12.220-21, Wang Anshi asks Su Xun to look over one of his son's compositions. Su Xun turns the task over to his daughter, who marks it up thoroughly but adds a few perceptive but inauspicious comments. Her father tears those comments off and substitutes flattering words instead. For another example, see Chen Sen, 4.55-56. 47 As early as the Tang dynasty, painters themselves wrote poems, inscriptions, and notes on their paintings (see Liao). In his Xianqing ouji (Random repository of idle thoughts; original preface 1671), "Pingzhou" (Screens and painting scrolls), p. 202, Li Yu told painters to leave spaces where inscriptions could be added. 48 Such activities take up the bulk of chap. 17 of the Honglou meng. 49 Referred to sometimes as "scholarly graffiti," moyai (cliff inscriptions) can be found at almost every scenic site in China. 5 For an example, see Piet Van Der Loon, The Classical Theatre and Art Song of South Fukien: A Study of Three Ming Anthologies (Taipei: SMC Publishing, 1992).

°

Introduction

19

fiction in the other. 5 1 Illustrations-which in the case of vernacular fiction first appeared in the upper registers of the pages, then were used to preface individual chapters or stories in novels and short-story collections, and finally ended up mostly gathered at the head of the volumes-constitute another kind of commentary, and they often carried poetic inscriptions or captions (see Nienhauser, pp. 17-35). Writing fiction commentaries is also discussed or portrayed in premodern Chinese novels. In one novel considered an imitation (fangshu) of the Honglou meng, two characters write private commentaries on the earlier novel, and the author uses the mention of an additional published commentary to comment indirectly on his own novel (Wei Xiuren, 25.213). In one of the sequels to the Honglou meng, the author of the original novel, Cao Xueqin, lives in the Jia household and is shown writing the text of the sequel itself. Lin Daiyu and Xue Baochai, who have miraculously become co-equal wives of Jia Baoyu, complete a commentary on both the original and the sequel that is compared to the famous (and notorious) commentary on Tang Xianzu's (1550-1616) play, Mudan ting (The peony pavilion) by Wu Wushan's (ca. 1657-after 1704) three wives. 52 Out of feminine modesty, the two wives refuse to let anyone, even Cao Xueqin, see their comments. 53 We should not be surprised that a drama commentary was cited as a model for a fiction commentary. Drama and fiction were close bedfellows in traditional China, so much so that they were sometimes not strictly distinguished. The tradition of writing commentary for plays began much earlier than for vernacular fiction. 54 Aside from the fact that drama enjoyed higher social status than fiction, a more fundamental reason for this is the focus on the poetic arias and their prosodic rules in drama commentary. Concern over such technical considerations, completely absent in fiction commentary, loomed large in early dramatic commentaries and was the 51

The registers are occupied by short literary-language fiction above and vernacular fiction below in the work commonly known as Xiaoshuo chuanqi (Tales and stories), a page of which is reproduced in Lu Gong, p. 143. Editions with the Shuihu zhuan in the upper register and the Sanguo yanyi in the lower one were numerous and appeared under titles such as Yingxiong pu (Roster of heroes) or Han Song qishu (Marvelous tales of the Han and Song dynasties). Andrew Lo investigated this phenomenon in his dissertation. 52 This Mudan ting commentary was notorious because some circles frowned upon the idea of publishing commentary written by women. Some people thought the commentary was really by Wu Wushan himself. For an example of someone holding both opinions, see Qingliang daoren (pseud.), "Tingyu xuan zhuiji" (Prolix notes from the listening to rain studio), in Wang Liqi, p. 221. On the authenticity of this commentary, see Zeitlin, "Shared Dreams," pp. 175-79. 53 See Xiaoyao Zi, 30/7b, 13b, 22b, 24a. The characters also make oral comments on the original novel. 54 The first commentaryless edition of the famous play Xixiang ji (Romance of the western chamber) did not appear until1616 (Jiang Xingyu, Ming kanben, p. 173).

20

Introduction

driving force behind their production. In China, the provision of performance directions in the form of notes for texts for oral performance dates back at least to Tang dynasty Dunhuang55 and reaches a kind of climax with Feng Menglong's comments to plays he revised or wrote himself, many of which are midway between stage directions and directorial comments. 56 Performance notes seldom appear in fiction commentary,S 7 but in drama itself it was not long before closet dramas (antou zhi ju) and reading plays as reading material rather than scripts became important and performing whole plays was abandoned in favor of presenting selected highlights from several different plays. The particular style of pingdian commentary developed for use in fiction commentaries (which surpass in bulk and complexity any other form of pingdian commentary) was eventually applied to plays; in fact, the most influential and popular examples of drama commentary were Jin Shengtan's Xixiang ji and the Maos' Pipa ji, written by the men most responsible for developing fiction pingdian commentary. Many fiction commentators edited their texts to at least some extent, whether covertly under the pretense that they had found an "ancient edition" (guben) or with open acknowledgment of their editorial contributions (the minority). Although we might at first attribute this cavalier attitude toward texts to the fact that fiction was not, in general, a respected genre of writing, closer inspection shows similar attitudes toward textual integrity in the case of more respected genres as well. The most famous example of a commentator editing a classical te;t is Zhu Xi's (1130-1200) repackaging of the Daxue (Great learning), which was elevated to extreme prominence as one of the Four Books (Sishu), the foundational texts of the traditional educational and examination systems. Not only did Zhu Xi rearrange the order of the paragraphs and relabel sections as "commentary," he also added a section (number 5) which he claimed was missing from the received text, and excised "superfluous characters." 58 Without bothering to concoct any kind of textual justification, the founding emperor of the Ming dynasty, Ming Taizu (r. 1368-98), had 85 passages in the Mencius that offended him expunged and prohibited from use as topics in the civil service examinations

55 See Richard E. Strassberg, "Buddhist Storytelling Texts from Tun-huang," CHINOPERL Papers 8 (1978): 39-71. 56 For examples in Feng's adaptation of the Mudan ting called Fengliu meng (The romantic dream), see Xu Fuming, Mudan ting, p. 65 (marginal comments to scene 23 on how the male lead should act, and on costumes in scenes 18 and 25). See Chapter 11 below. 57 Huang Xiaotian does tell the reader to read passages in a loud voice and with emphasis (gaosheng zhongdu; Huang Xiaotian, Honglou meng, 67.803, 805, ic). 58 Henderson, p. 153. Zhu Xi's revisions were criticized by Wang Yangming (1472-1529), among others.

Introduction

21

(Albert Chan, p. 15; Elman, pp. 42-49). If even the texts of the classics were not sacrosanct, then how could the texts of early vernacular fiction and drama be? 59 In any case, as John Henderson has said, "expurgation and excision, to say nothing of editing and compiling, are essential commentarial activities in almost any tradition or civilization" (p. 30).

59

Our understanding of Yuan dynasty drama, for instance, is made difficult by the fact that most extant playscripts were edited (sometimes drastically) by late Ming literati such as Zang Maoxun (1550-1620).

1

Mr. "Pingdian ":fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

Jin Shengtan is the single most important figure in traditional Chinese fiction criticism. 1 He spent his life in Suzhou, an important cultural center in South China. 2 The overabundance of literary talent there, combined with the regional quota system for the civil service examinations, may have contributed to his lack of success in the examinations, a failing commonly attributed to a lack of self-control. He seems to have supported himself by writing and teaching (Zhang Guoguang, Shuihu, p. 91). Jin Shengtan's role as a champion of fiction is well known, but instead of arguing that it was a new and rising genre of literature suited to the times, as had Li Zhi ("Tongxin shuo," SHZZLHB 191) and others, he tried to associate fiction with the classics and belles-lettres. To achieve this, he cited the Confucian judgment that "fiction" (xiaoshuo) could not be completely ignored, 3 claimed rhetorical flourishes in the Shuihu zhuan to be extensions of similar techniques in the Lunyu (Confucian analects; SHZHPB 10, third preface), and listed both the Shuihu zhuan and Xixiang ji as works by and for geniuses (caizi shu) together with the "Lisao" (Encountering sorrow), the Zhuang Zi, the Shiji, and the poetry of Du Fu (712-70). But his attempts to legitimize fiction by association with the past should not obscure the revolutionary character of his endeavors. Besides pingdian-style criticism on a variety of genres, Jin Shengtan also wrote several philosophical works, most of which are particularly con-

1 The late Qing critic Qiu Weixuan said, "The idea of commenting on fiction did not originate with Jin Shengtan, but the school [pai] of fiction commentary did" (Shuyuan zhuitan [Prolix talks from Qiu Weixuan; 1897], Lunzhu xuan, 2: 14). 2 On Suzhou as a center for literati interested in fiction, see Hegel, "Aesthetics." 3 See SHZHPB 10, third preface, which refers to Lunyu, XIX.4. The original comment was made by Zixia, one of Confucius' disciples, and refers only to unspecified xiaodao Qittle ways). The association of this passage with fiction and its attribution to Confucius himself occurs most prominently in the "Yiwen zhi" (Treatise on literature) chapter of the Hanshu (see Ban Gu, p. 30.1745).

26

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

cerned with the Yijing (The book of changes) or Buddhism. Together with Neo-Confucianism, these three fields of learning seem to have exerted the greatest influence on his thought, and terminology from all three appear in his criticism. In his own definition of zhong, which usually refers to loyalty in a political context, Jin Shengtan seems to have had in mind loyalty to oneself, or something approaching self-authenticity. Projection of this principle toward others he called shu (usually translated as "reciprocity"). 4 Jin Shengtan not only praised fictional characters in the Shuihu zhuan such as Li Kui and Lu Zhishen for exemplifying zhongshu and attacked characters such as Song Jiang for not doing so, but also made zhongshu an important part of his conception of the author of genius as one able to impersonate characters without a trace of his own ego. 5 As for achieving this goal, Jin Shengtan offered a Buddhist and a Neo-Confucian route without, however, making any such distinction between them. On the Buddhist side, Jin spoke of the idea of yinyuan shengfa (phenomena are produced by primary and secondary conditions) to explain how an author can project effects from causes. On the Neo-Confucian side, he used the important and contested concept of gewu (usually taken to mean the investigation of things [in order to understand their essential pattern, or li]) as the philosophical basis by which the author is to create characters both independent and different from himself. 6 In his commentaries Jin Shengtan constructed the author as an allpowerful creator in control of all aspects of the process. Jin Shengtan's commentarial work on fiction involved explicating all exemplary features, excising (as much as possible) substandard parts, and teaching the reader how to duplicate the results for himself; such a project left little room for the idea either that inspiration comes from without or that the author might not be fully in control of the process of creation. Failure to consider ~For his definition of zhang and shu, see SHZHPB 9, third preface, and 42.788-89, cc. The processes of achieving (or maintaining) personal authenticity and authenticity in one's relations with others are described as cheng yu zhang, xing yu wai (sincerity on the inside, expressed on the outside; a quote from the Daxue) in the chapter comment cited above, where he claims that his use of these terms dates back to a now lost Confucian tradition. See John Wang, Chin Sheng·t'an, pp. 45-47. 5 John Wang, Chin Sheng-t'an, pp. 45-47. Shu was also used by Zhang Xuecheng (17381801) to describe the historian's imaginative re-creation of or identification with his subjects (Wenshi tangyi, "Wende" [Literary virtue], p. 278). 6 For his use of yinyuan shengfa and gewu, see SHZHPB 9 (third preface) and 55.1018, cc. For a translation of this portion of the third preface, see John Wang, Chin Sheng·t'an, p. 46. See also Ye Lang, p. 89; and Chen Hong, "Yinyuan sheng fa shuo." Later fiction commentators influenced by Jin Shengtan use both terms in reference to the author's skill in characterization. For example, see HLMZLHB 81, chap. 31, cc, of Qasbuu's (Chinese name, Hasibao, fl. 1819-48) translation of the Hanglau meng into Mongolian (translated from Mongolian into Chinese by Yi Linzhen).

fin Shengtan and the ((Shuihu zhuan"

27

adequately the problem of literary inspiration is one fault that Li Yu laid at Jin Shengtan's door. 7 Andrew H. Plaks has argued that irony is the unifying feature in the socalled complex (fan) versions of the Shuihu zhuan. 8 The majority of the popular treatments of Song Jiang, on stage or elsewhere, tend to take his pretensions to heroism at face value, 9 but in most of them, it is Li Kui or one of the other more colorful and anti-authoritarian characters who really captures the interest of authors, performers, and audience. 10 Even before the success of the Jin Shengtan version of the novel and the eclipse of the longer versions, very few plays treated incidents occurring after chapter 71, and virtually none treated incidents after amnesty is granted to the outlaws.11 We may by right expect more subtlety and less subservience to traditional values from fiction than from drama, but locating a unifying consciousness or implied author informing all parts of the Shuihu zhuan is difficult. Yet it was precisely this challenge Jin Shengtan took up in his work, using the dual strategy of revising the text of the novel and placing that revised version within the context of his added commentary.

Jin Shengtan's Commentary Edition of the Shuihu zhuan The Shuihu zhuan as it existed prior to Jin Shengtan's redaction can be divided into several sections. First, a historical introduction beginning with the founding of the Song dynasty and centering on the curing of the plague 7 For a different assessment of the role of inspiration in Jin Shengtan's literary theory, see John Wang, Chin Sheng-t'an, pp. 44-45. I think that Jin Shengtan's concept of "inspiration" centers more on the idea of a fortuitous and irreproducible conjunction of factors instead of an extraordinary type of connection with the outside world or forces outside the author's control, as with Li Yu. See Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Tianci yulun" (Additional remarks on playwriting), p. 104. 8 See Plaks, "Shui-hu chuan," and its revised form in his Four Masterworks, "Shui-hu chuan: Deflation of Heroism," pp. 279-358. For some idea of the difficulty felt by a modern reader in becoming the implied reader of the Shuihu zhuan, see Hsia, Classic Chinese Novel, "The Water Margin," pp. 75-114. 9 Except for plays dealing with his mistress, Y an Po xi, in which he comes off as a foolish cuckold. 10 In the list of zaju plays dating from the Yuan to the Qing dynasty dealing with Shuihu material in Ma Tiji, Shuihu shulu, pp. 440-451, Song Jiang's name appears only five times in their short titles compared to 14 times for Li Kui. 11 Pre-existing plots from zaju plays (such as the one detailing Li Kui's short term as a magistrate) seem to have been written into the novel in the chapters between the oath of loyalty in chap. 71 and the acceptance of amnesty in chap. 82 as filler rather than as integral parts of the novel. In Tao Junqi's list of Peking opera plays only three plays apiece treat material from chaps. 71-82 and the campaign against Fang La, compared to almost fifty dealing with events prior to chap. 71.

28

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

and the release of the star spirits occupies the introduction ("Yinshou"), chapter 1, and the first part of chapter 2. After a hiatus of many years, the story picks up again with Wang Jin, who, though not destined to join the Shuihu band himself, leads the reader to the first future member introduced in the novel, Shi Jin. In the following chapters, the reader follows the fortunes of other future members and witnesses the overthrow of a false leader of the band, Wang Lun, in favor of Chao Gai. The band reaches its predestined number of members in chapter 71 after the latter's death. The next few chapters feature a trip to the Eastern Capital and the appearance of Emperor Huizong, but most of the attention centers on individual band members (Li Kui and Yan Qing in particular) and their exploits. Government attempts to defeat the rebels form a unifying theme in these chapters, but the band itself is divided between "anarchists" who wish to hold out and "loyalists" led by Song Jiang, who is supposedly only waiting for amnesty and the chance to lead the outlaws against enemies of the state. Opposition to him evaporates rather unrealistically by chapter 82 (unless the author's real point was to portray the suppression of the other members of the band by Song Jiang). Another cause for bewilderment is the failure of the band to take revenge on its mortal enemies once it has them in its power. 12 After the amnesty the band carries out a successful campaign against the Liao dynasty, which takes up about ten chapters. In stark contrast to the Fang La campaign that concludes :.ll but Jin Shengtan's version of the novel, none of the 108 heroes dies in the campaign against the Liao. This fact is one of the clearest proofs that these chapters (as well as the interpolated twenty chapters in the 120-chapter version) 13 are a late addition to the written story of the Shuihu band. There is a clear-cut development in the novel from the overthrow of the false rebel band led by Wang Lun after the first decade of chapters until the taking of the oath of loyalty by the full complement of 108 heroes in chapter 71 and the proclamation of a new utopian regime. This development, however, is undercut at several points in ways that cast doubt on whether the new band is any better than Wang Lun's. Several extended campaigns against neighboring villages have almost nothing to do with upholding

12 Contrast the revenge taken on Huang Wenbing (chap. 41) and the treatment of Gao Qiu when he is captured (chap. 80). The novel is more historical in its treatment of the downfall of the Cai Jing clique than is Li Kaixian's (1502-68) Baojian ji (Story of the precious sword), in which Lin Chong is allowed to personally execute his nemesis, Gao Qiu, or Chen Chen's Shuihu houzhuan, which lingers over the execution of Cai Jing and three other evil ministers by members of the band (chap. 27). 13 None of the band dies in the two additional campaigns against Wang Qing and Tian Hu that make up these chapters.

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

29

righteousness, and the last campaign prior to chapter 71 is undertaken solely for the purpose of getting provisions and selecting a leader for the band. Dong Ping, one of the last of the heroes to join the band, is particularly ruthless. 14 Most remarkable about Jin Shengtan's edition of the Shuihu zhuan is his excision of the last 49 chapters of the version he used as his base text. 15 U ntil recently, Hu Shi's idea that Jin Shengtan's displeasure with the last part of the novel was based on antipathy toward the contemporary policy of granting amnesty to bandits was accepted as the last word on the subject. 16 If we look, however, to Jin Shengtan's edition of the Xixiang ji, where his main complaint against the last play in this cycle of five is that it is both inferior to and by another hand than the first four plays, we have reason to see the excision of the amnesty chapters as part of a campaign to reduce internal contradictions and to save the best part of the novel. The other major structural change made by Jin Shengtan was to reorganize the beginning of the novel. The older complex editions begin with a brief section marked "Yinshou," which takes the story from the founding of the Song to the outbreak of a plague several reigns later. The "Yinshou" is separated from chapter 1 in many editions by illustrations and other prefatory matter, which might explain the omission of the "Yinshou" in some editions before Jin Shengtan's. 17 Jin Shengtan combined the "Yinshou" with chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 2 to form a "prologue" (xiezi). This quarantines the supernatural elements in those sections and highlights the rise of Gao Qiu with its themes of governmental corruption and malfeasance by giving it the prominent location of the first chapter. Jin Shengtan made many other changes; indeed almost every page was affected. He cut all poetry and parallel prose in the novel except the poems that open and close the work and poetry quoted by the fictional characters. He justified all these changes by claiming that they appear in a guben (an-

14 See the Rongyu tang edition commentator's criticism of Dong Ping, SHZHPB 68.1250, ic, and 68.1251, cc. 15 Although he had access to the Rongyu tang edition, his text follows the Yuan Wuyai 120chapter version most closely (see the collation notes in SHQZ). For a bibliographical description of Jin Shengtan's edition, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 413. 16 See Hu Shi, "Shuihu," pp. 60-61. At the time he wrote this article, Hu Shi had not yet come to the conclusion that Jin Shengtan's 70-chapter edition was of his own making, and he advanced his argument to explain Jin Shengtan's attitude toward Song Jiang and the granting of amnesty rather than the excision of the ending of the novel. Later scholars, however, quote Hu Shi to explain Jin Shengtan's "'decapitation' at the waist" (yaozhan) of the novel as well. 17 These include the "Zhong Xing" commentary edition (based on the Rongyu tang edition and customarily dated 1625-27), the Jiezi yuan edition (sometime after 1612), and the edition held in the Mukyiikai Library in Japan. For bibliographical descriptions, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 407-8, 410.

30

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

cient edition) found in Guanhua tang, the studio of a friend. Although the existence of this guben was not seriously challenged until this century, by which time the competing editions had generally fallen into obscurity or disappeared from China, certain of his contemporaries were skeptical. 18 In the last of three prefaces to his edition, which he addressed to his tenyear-old (Chinese count) son, Jin Shengtan claimed he first obtained a popular (su) edition of the novel when he was eleven (Chinese count) and borrowed a copy of the guben when he was twelve. "Copying day and night and adding comments and explanations, I worked from the fourth to the eighth month, when this project was finally completed." He identifies this commentary with the one for which this preface was written (SHZHPB 9-10). If we take him at his word (as Chen Hong, Lilun shi, p. 153n1, is inclined to do), then he would have written his commentary twenty years earlier, when amnesty for bandits was not yet a major point of contention. It is also possible that Jin Shengtan is purposefully backdating his commentary for safety's sake, as Chen Chen did for his novel (see Chapter 11 below). The number of juan (fascicles) for the commentary given in the third preface is short by three. The one and only prohibition of a novel in the Ming dynasty was a ban on the Shuihu zhuan promulgated in 1642 (Wang Liqi, pp. 16-18). From 1641 (the date on the third preface) to 1644 (the accepted date of publication for the edition itself) would be more than enough time to cook up the first two prefaces, the comments to the quotations from historical works, and the dufa (how to read) essay, 19 all of which are marked by seemingly reactionary sentiments frequently contradicted by comments elsewhere in the commentary.

Jin Shengtan and His Predecessors It is customary to point to Liu Chenweng (1232-97) as the first to produce a pingdian commentary on a work of fiction. 20 The work that he wrote the commentary on, Shishuo xinyu, is better treated as a collection of historical anecdotes than as fiction, even if it was traditionally classified as xiaoshuo (commonly translated as "fiction" but actually covering a far greater variety of texts than the English word). The commentary does, however, treat topics later developed in commentary on vernacular fiction texts, particularly 18 E.g., Zhou Lianggong (1612-72), Yinshu wu shuying (Shadows of books in Yinshu Lodge), SHZZLHB 153, and Chen Chen (see Liu Cunren, Lundun, p. 170, for the note on the title page for the 1664 edition of the Shuihu houzhuan). 19 These items are the most likely candidates for the missing three juan. 20 An exegetical commentary on Zhang Zhuo's (ca. 657-730) tale in literary Chinese, You xianku (A visit to the goddesses' cave) was probably written in the ninth century and certainly before 1156, when it was quoted. Although Arthur Waley thought that it was by Bo Xingjian (775-826), Ronald Egan argues more convincingly that it was written in Japan.

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

31

the comparative evaluation of characters as both the responsibility of the commentator and a major feature of the author's artistry. Liu Chenweng was definitely a pioneer in pingdian commentary in general, at least as far as the earliest stages of that tradition can be seen in extant texts. Besides publishing pingdian commentaries on poetry, he also wrote comments on the Shiji, a historical text but one important to the development of fiction in China (see Chapter 5 below). From Liu Chenweng to the late Ming, interesting comments about fiction were written in prefaces to collections of literary-language fiction or in the jottings of literati, but no real fiction pingdian were composed. In the middle and late Ming, editions with collected interpretive commentary (pinglin, literally, "forest of comments") of famous historical works such as the Shiji and the Hanshu did very well in the bookshops. 21 Their basic format, as well as the pinglin of their titles, was applied to works of fiction by a commercial publisher, Yu Xiangdou (ca. 1550-after 1637). 22 He and the famous Fujian publishing family to which he belonged produced editions with rudimentary commentary for three novels: Sanguo yanyi (1592), 23 Shuihu zhuan (1594), and Lieguo zhi (Romance of the feudal states; reprinted 1606). Whereas the commentaries published by Yu Xiangdou were primarily commercial ventures, those on drama and fiction by Li Zhi and described in his letters and the writings of his friends clearly represented labors of love. However, we have no reason to believe that any of the scores of commentaries that bear his name are faithful reproductions of an original commentary by him (see the relevant appendixes to Plaks, Four Masterworks, and Rolston, How to Read). The bulk of them are attempts to capitalize on his fame and contain comments of little interest and sometimes, despite assertions in their titles and elsewhere to the contrary, no commentary at ali.2 4 The "Li Zhi" commentaries that exerted the greatest influence on later commentators and writers were two on the Shuihu zhuan. The first was published by the Rongyu tang in Hangzhou sometime before their reprint21 Most famous were Ling Zhilong's Shiji ping/in (preface 1576) and his Hanshu ping/in (preface 1581). 22 For a reproduction of a self-portrait he included in one of his many publications, see Xiao Dongfa, p. 212. 23 Yu Xiangdou actually published two different editions of the Sanguo yanyi with commentary, neither of which is now extant in its entirety. 24 For instance, the Qing reprint with a 1589 preface used as the base text for SHQZ contains no commentary but still proclaims that it has been read and commented on (pingyue) by Li Zhi (SHQZ, "Yinshou," pp. 1, 3n2). Commentaries of comparatively little interest were also attributed to other famous men such as Zhong Xing (1574-1625), Chen Jiru (1558-1639), and Tang Xianzu (1550-1616).

32

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

ing of it in 1610. 25 The second was published by Yuan Wuyai in Suzhou and appeared in 1612 or slightly earlier. Both contain versions of the preface to the novel by Li Zhi that appears in editions of his collected works, but in the Rongyu tang edition the attitude of the commentator toward the novel and its main character, Song Jiang, varies greatly from that in Li Zhi's preface. Although there is less discrepancy between the interpretation of the novel in the Li Zhi preface and in the commentary in the Yuan Wuyai edition, that edition has 120 chapters, and the preface had to be doctored to avoid contradicting the novel on this point. The Rongyu tang also published "Li Zhi" commentaries on plays. All such commentaries by that publisher, as well as the "Li Zhi" commentaries on the Sanguo yanyi and the Xiyou ji by other publishers26 seem to be from the same man, most likely Ye Zhou. 27 The Rongyu tang Shuihu zhuan commentary, as well as many of the other commentaries now thought to be by Ye Zhou, is distinguished by its flippancy, the marking of passages of text for excision rather than the actual excising of them, and an interest in pointing out problems of characterization, plot structure, and grammar. Although the ideological orientation of the commentary in the Yuan Wuyai edition is much closer to that in the Li Zhi preface to the novel, there are many ties between it and the Rongyu tang edition. Many passages marked for excision in the earlier commentary are removed or otherwise changed in the later one (some are attributed to an "old edition"), and some comments appear in both editions. T.}lere is a possibility that Y e Zhou was also involved with the Yuan Wuyai edition. There are reasons to believe that Ye may be the author of Shuzhai manlu (Leisurely notes from Useless Wood Studio), a 1612 work published under the name of Xu Zichang (see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 358-59 and 359n8). This work describes the preparation of the Yuan Wuyai edition and indicates that the author of Shuzhai manlu offered some materials for use in the project, but his advice about Li Zhi's reading of the novel was not taken (SHZZLHB 217). Most likely either one edition or both editions of the novel that Jin Shengtan claimed to have come across when young were copies of the Yuan Wuyai edition or later reprints. This large-format and lavishly illustrated edition was buttressed by a carefully orchestrated attempt to prove its connection to Li Zhi, including a preface signed with the name of Li 25 Around 1624-25, a reprocessed version of this commentary was published under the name of Zhong Xing. For bibliographical description see Liu Shide, "Zhongpi Shuihu zhuan"; and Rolston, How to Read, pp. 407-8. 26 See Rolston, How to Read, pp. 432-33, 451, for bibliographical descriptions of these last two commentaries. 27 On the similarities in those commentaries and on Y e Zhou himself, see ibid., pp. 38-39, 356-59.

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

33

Zhi's disciple, Yang Dingjian; testimonials by such as Yuan Zhongdao (1570-1623; see his Youju Fei lu, SHZZLHB 223-24); and the editorial assistance of Suzhou literati such as Feng Menglong (Shuzhai manlu, SHZZLHB 217). This, clearly, was the edition to be reckoned with, especially in Suzhou, where it was first printed. According to the calculations of Chen Jinzhao (p. 24), there are 86 places in Jin Shengtan's commentary where he refers to the vulgar or popular edition (suben), and in all cases the description fits the situation in the Yuan Wuyai edition. Jin Shengtan also criticizes Li Zhi directly, saying that for characters in the novel to occasionally employ strident attacks on society (mashi yu) is all right, but one should not make a practice of imitating Li Zhi by doing it all the time (SHZHPB 31.604, ic). Despite this attempt to distance the two editions, Jin Shengtan actually made heavy use of innovations in the Yuan Wuyai edition. For instance, a prefatory piece in the latter entitled "Fafan" attributes its inventions to a guben, the same basic gambit used by Jin Shengtan. Besides following many of the textual revisions made in the earlier edition, Jin Shengtan also borrowed ideas and language from the "Li Zhi" commentary in it. 28 A point of contention between the two editions is the inclusion of the words zhongyi Ooyal and righteous) in the title. The earliest fragment from a printed edition of the Shuihu zhuan, found in Shanghai in the 1970s, has the title ]ingben Zhongyi zhuan (Capital edition of The Tale of the Loyal and Righteous). Here zhongyi refers to a type of men, as it does in the titles of collective biographies of those who exemplify these virtues in several dynastic histories. However, although the titles of most editions contain zhongyi, the term almost always modifies shuihu (water margin). In his preface, Li Zhi stressed the idea that Song Jiang is the epitome of loyalty and righteousness. 29 Taking their lead from this, the editors of the Yuan Wuyai edition also made much of the loyalty and righteousness of their heroes and even claimed that Li Zhi had been responsible for the "restoration" of the two words to the title. 30 Jin Shengtan's attack on the inclusion of the words zhongyi in the title at the beginning of his second preface to the novel seems to accept the proposition that Li Zhi had added the words. Jin Shengtan called the responsible

28

Chen Jinzhao, pp. 120, 124, estimates that in about 200 places comments by Jin Shengtan are similar to those in the Yuan Wuyai edition, and in over 100 places the same examples or metaphors are used. 29 The preface is included in Li Zhi's Fenshu (Book for burning; first published 1590), SHZZLHB 192-93. 30 See item 3 of the "Fafan," SHZZLHB 31. Some abridged editions of the novel lacked these two words in their title, but it is hard to imagine that the editors of the Yuan Wuyai edition thought themselves to be in competition with them.

34

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

person a "rascal with a taste for creating disorder" and said that if the loyal and righteous "were all in the water margin on the fringes of the empire, then that would mean that there are no loyal and righteous at court." 31 The "self-evident" untruth of the latter half of the sentence supposedly proves the falsity of the first half. But things are not so simple. As is also the case with Jin Shengtan's ironic use of the words Tianxia taiping (all under Heaven is at peace) to close both the prologue and the novel, the apparent meaning diverges from the underlying meaning or is contradicted by later events or comments. An important facet of Jin Shengtan's reading of the novel is surely the idea that most court officials are disloyal and unrighteous, and that Huizong, the playboy emperor with Daoist leanings on the throne, is also not beyond reproach. In place of zhongyi, Jin Shengtan stressed the importance of the words shuihu in the title, claiming that the author's intent was to emphasize the banishment of the outlaws to the margins of the empire. Any reader of the Shijing (Classic of poetry), however, will remember poem number 237, "Mian," in which an ancestor of the Zhou royal house, Danfu, leads his people away from oppression to the west and into the "water margin," where they establish a new state and lay the foundation for the later conquest of the empire by Kings Wen and Wu (see Legge, 4: 438, for Chinese text and translation). This is the only place in the Confucian classics where these two characters occur together. Two other points on which Jin SJlengtan directly attacked Li Zhi and the editions of the novel that contain his preface and claim to carry his commentary are the compilation of the Collected Works of Li Kui (variously referred to as Shouzhang wenji, Shouzhang xianling Hei xuanfeng ji, Hei xuanfeng ji, or Shouzhang zhuan) and whether the novel is an expression of resentment on the part of the author. The Collected Works of Li Kui was a volume apparently published by the Rongyu tang of Hangzhou/ 2 but also mentioned approvingly in the prefatory matter of the Yuan Wuyai edition of the Shuihu zhuan (item 10 of the "Fafan," SHZHPB 32). In item 28 of his dufa essay on the novel, Jin Shengtan said: "Recently there was someone who did not grasp the author's intention in pairing Song Jiang and Li Kui. He selected out all the passages about Li Kui into a separate volume called Shouzhang wenji [The collected writings of the magistrate of Shouzhang]. 31

SHZHPB 6-7. Jin Shengtan also protested the addition of zhong;yi to the title by "someone of later times" (i.e., Li Zhi), SHZHPB 15, d/1 (John Wang, "How to Read," pp. 13132). 32 See the last item (in small print) attached to "Piping Shuihu zhuan shuyu" (Recorded remarks on commenting on the Shuihu zhuan), a prefatory essay in the Rongyu tang edition of the Shuihu zhuan, SHZHPB 25, which claims that Li Zhi did the compilation. A contemporary, Qian Xiyan, believed that Ye Zhou was the actual compiler (Xixia, SHZZLHB 151).

]in Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

35

He indeed can be said to be one who eats human excrement-not a very good dog" (SHZHPB 18; translation from John Wang, "How to Read," p. 137).

Li Zhi's preface begins with a review of Sima Qian's theory that great literature is the product of resentment (fafen zhushu), followed by the blunt statement that the Shuihu zhuan is an example of this (SHZHPB 28). 33 In one of the most prominent locations in his commentary, the first item of his dufa essay, Jin Shengtan rejected this notion, claiming that unlike Sima Qian's Shiji, the Shuihu zhuan is neither at odds with the judgment of the sages (a reference to Ban Gu's [62.2737] criticism of the Shiji) nor a work of resentment. The picture given there of the author of the Shuihu zhuan as a carefree person with nothing else to do, as well as the similarly conceived authorial persona in the preface Jin Shengtan wrote under the name of Shi Nai'an, are directly contradicted in his chapter and interlineal comments. Several of these later comments (or do they predate the prefatory material?) explicitly liken the Shuihu zhuan to the Shiji as a product of resentment (e.g., SHZHPB 6.167, ic, and 18.342, cc). Even as he did his best to distinguish his edition and interpretation of the novel from earlier ones, Jin Shengtan was greatly indebted to his critical forebears. We have already noted his reliance on the comments in the Yuan Wuyai edition, but some of the peculiarities of his commentary, such as his attack on Song Jiang as hypocritical, have their roots in the Rongyu tang commentary (see Chapter 8 below). He was also indebted to the Rongyu tang commentator for pointing out stylistic and other weaknesses in the novel. Both he and the editors of the Yuan Wuyai edition tried to correct some of those, even though they usually adopted quite different solutions.

Jin Shengtan's Intentions The question about Jin Shengtan engendering the most debate is his politics and how they relate to his expressed attitudes toward Song Jiang and the other rebels. Hu Shi related Jin Shengtan's supposed anti-amnesty program in his commentary to the disastrous effects of contemporary Oate Ming) governmental policy toward rebels. Steps that seem connected to this idea include his excision of the last portion of the novel, containing both the first serious debate over accepting amnesty and the tragic career of the band after the amnesty, and the elimination of earlier predictions of Song Jiang's career after the amnesty (e.g., SHQZ 42.687n65). The nightmare Jin Shengtan added to conclude his version describes the execution of the entire band 33 On fa/en zhushu, see Sima Qian, 130.3300. Li Zhi's view of the Shuihu zhuan is seconded by Chen Chen in his "Shuihu houzhuan lunliie" (Brief discussion of the Shuihu houzhuan), item

1, SHZZLHB 554.

36

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

by Zhang Shuye and is followed by quotation of the words Tianxia tai-

ping.34 We can approach the problem of Jin Shengtan's attitude from several different angles, but the whole question is inseparable from his branding of Song Jiang as a hypocrite. Song Jiang's repeated claims to be only biding his time until an amnesty is granted are already undercut by internal contradictions in the earliest versions of the novel. His use of this argument to all and sundry, even to government officers he is attempting to persuade to join his band (see SHZHPB 57.1054, cc), as well as his willingness to plot ruthlessly against them and other contented citizens to force them to join, invites suspicion. Jin Shengtan strengthened this impression of deviousness with cries of "trickery" at every mention by Song Jiang of his waiting for an amnesty, no matter how innocent these may appear at first sight. He also used minor revisions to make Song Jiang seem hypocritical (see Chapter 8 below). Jin Shengtan's opposition to amnesty for rebels is generally taken for granted. Holders of that view often point to his list of eight flaws in a memorial proposing amnesty for the real Song Jiang by Hou Meng (10541121) in the section of his commentary containing quotes from historical texts (SHZHPB 14). A few pages earlier in the same section, however, he explicitly stated that "to cause him [Song Jiang] to surrender and not execute him is great benevolence on the part of the emperor and an 'excellent way to handle bandits [chudao zhi shan/a]'': (SHZHPB 12). Also taken for granted is the idea that in opposing amnesty for rebels Jin Shengtan was speaking on behalf of the government and the elite strata. The concluding nightmare, however, shows that after Zhang Shuye captures Lu Junyi, Song Jiang and his military advisor cook up a plot that is functionally equivalent to accepting government amnesty-they surrender to Zhang Shuye and plead for mercy. 35 Zhang Shuye executes them all instead, but his final remarks might constitute an oblique comment by Jin Shengtan on the idea of the rebels' accepting amnesty (as opposed to the government's granting of it)-Zhang Shuye accuses the rebels of abandoning their dignity and "wagging their tails in order to gain pity [yaowei qilian ]" (SHZHPB 70.1272). A bone of contention between traditional commentators was whether the Shuihu band members are righteous rebels (yishi) or mere brigands (qiangdao). The Rongyu tang commentary is the most uncompromising in 34 Zhang Shuye (1065-1127) is given credit for the capture of the real Song Jiang in historical works, including the one quoted in the front matter of Jin Shengtan's commentary (SHZHPB 11). The novel only hints at his identity (e.g., a pun in the description points to his surname), but an interlineal comment explicitly identifies him (SHZHPB 70.1272). 35 The parallel is reinforced by the language used by one of the band to explain their plot to Lu Junyi (SHZHPB 70.1272).

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

37

its condemnation of them as brigands, applying the term even to those members of the band tricked into joining, such as Qin Ming and Huyan Zhuo, claiming that the latter are not as worthy of praise as the Three Heroes of the Zhu clan or the Five Tigers of the Zeng clan (see "Liangshan po yibai dan ba ren youlie," SHZHPB 26). For Li Zhi, however, the epithet qiangdao held no fear. He recorded approvingly the words of a monk friend of his, Huailin: "As for cursing someone as a brigand, that is not really cursing at all; rather, it is more of a commendation."}6 Li Zhi himself praised a pirate named Lin Daoqian who operated off the coast of southeast China for thirty years and was supported by the people (see his "Yinji wangshi," Fenshu, 4.156-58). The commentator in the Yuan Wuyai edition defended the band against the charge of being brigands. As for Jin Shengtan, it is the anarchic characters, such as Lu Zhishen, Li Kui, and Ruan Xiaoqi, that he praised most openly.} 7

Premodern Assessments of Jin Shengtan's Intentions Recently Zhang Guoguang has advanced the theory that the clearly "reactionary" sections of Jin Shengtan's commentary are camouflage (baohu se) for its radically subversive nature. }S We can also find proponents of this theory before the May Fourth movement. Yannan Shangsheng, author of a 1908 commentary on the Shuihu zhuan, had many harsh things to say about Jin (he called him a "slave"), but he asserted that Jin used his commentary to divert attention from the subversive nature of the novel: The Shuihu zhuan is a book that under an authoritarian government was taken as offensive to the ruler and an incitement to riot, and so Jin Shengtan comments on it in terms of literary technique. But since he was still afraid that, with the authoritarian government undertaking a literary inquisition, they would take as a crime his praising of Song Jiang, he slanders Song Jiang in order to cover himself in the eyes of the government. (SHZZLHB 393-94, Xinping Shuihu zhuan, "Xin huowen," item 3) 36

See the second section of "Handeng xiaohua" (Chats by the cold lamp), in Li Zhi, Fenshu, 4.190. Some of the prefatory material in the Rongyu tang edition is attributed to Huailin. The difference in attitude toward the word qiangdao between the two "Huailins" makes the attribution suspect. 37 In the case of Wu Song, whom Jin praised above all the other members of the band in his dufa essay, Jin Shengtan denies the sincerity of his readiness to accept amnesty, claiming that Wu Song agrees with Song Jiang only out of a sense of indebtedness (SHZHPB 31.597, ic). 38 See, e.g., Zhang Guoguang, Shuihu, p. 122. One piece of evidence that he quotes from the Jin Shengtan commentary to prove intentionality is a comment from the end of the novel, "Ah! Among ancient gentleman, never was there a case where they were not careful and circumspect yet had their works transmitted" (SHZHPB 70.1262, cc). Zhang Guoguang consistently overstates his case. He has also praised Jin Shengtan as anti-Manchu.

38

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

Such a reading of Jin Shengtan's commentary is easier to swallow than numerous uncritical readings that take segments in the commentary out of context and at face value. In 1657, Wang Wangru brought out a new edition of the Jin Shengtan commentary with his added comments, all of which share the same point of view as the "camouflage" sections in Jin Shengtan's commentary. He approved of Jin Shengtan's rejection of the words zhongyi in the title and said that without the help of Jin Shengtan's commentary, the novel would be too hard on the emperor and too lenient on the brigands (sHZZLHB 351, preface). On the nightmare that concludes Jin Shengtan's version, he said, "I do not like to read the Shuihu zhuan; what I like to read is the Shuihu zhuan with commentary by Jin Shengtan. Because it ends with the nightmare, its merit toward the work of the sages is not trivial" (SHZZLHB 352, "Zonglun"). In the twentieth century, the editor of Xinshi Shuihu yanyi (New-style Romance of the Water Margin; 1924) spoke, in the same language Jin Shengtan used in item 1 of his dufa essay, of Shi Nai'an's motives (or lack of same) for writing the novel and added, "How could it be that he [Shi Nai'an] envied the bravos of the Liangshan marsh? The reader should not misunderstand" (Shuihu yanjiu ziliao, p. 178, "Shuihu zhuan kaozheng"). Whereas Wang Wangru was still dubious about Jin Shengtan's claim that Shi Nai'an was the author of the real Shuihu zhuan (chapters 1-70) and Luo Guanzhong but the author of an inferior sequel to it, before long the idea was almost universally accepted. Yu ~anchun (1794-1849) wrote a sequel to the Jin Shengtan version of the Shuihu zhuan, Dangkou zhi (The suppression of the bandits), which begins with chapter 71. An 1851 preface to the original edition accused Luo Guanzhong of taking false appearances in the 70-chapter "original" seriously. The preface writer praised Jin Shengtan for exposing the hidden deviousness of Song Jiang and others, but regretted the lack of details about the final demise of the "villains" (SHZZLHB 581, Guyue laoren preface). In his own preface, Yu Wanchun accepted the idea that Jin Shengtan hated Song Jiang's hypocrisy and agreed with the other preface writer that the "Luo Guanzhong continuation" portrays Song Jiang as if he were really loyal and righteous (SHZZLHB 579). Yu was apparently convinced that he was extending Jin Shengtan's interpretation and treating the Shuihu band justly by exterminating them, but his project still falls short in the execution: the old stalwarts from the marshes are more appealing than his chosen paragon, Chen Xizhen. There were, of course, other ways to treat the "discrepancies" between the different parts of the early version of the Shuihu zhuan. Takizawa Bakin (1767-1848), who translated the first ten chapters of the novel into Japanese and who was greatly influenced by the novel and some of its sequels, saw a three-stage development in the 120-chapter version. According to him, the

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

39

characters begin well, turn bad, but end up loyal (shozen chz1aku gochzl; Nakamura Kohiko, p. 120). He was very skeptical about Jin Shengtan's interpretation of the novel (as he conceived it). There was also a substantial contingent of critics that felt Jin Shengtan approved of rebellion. The most famous example is Gui Zhuang (1613-73), who called for Jin Shengtan's execution for promoting a book that teaches people to become brigands (huidao; John Wang, Chin Sheng-t'an, pp. 12021). Mao Lun, in his commentary on the Pipa ji (Story of the lute), described the situation: "In the case of the commentator on the Shuihu zhuan [i.e., Jin Shengtan], although he denigrates with extreme vigor the deviousness [quanzha] of Song Jiang, people still think that he was teaching others to become bandits [huidao]" (PPJZLHB 286, "Zonglun"). Mao Lun did not himself think that Jin Shengtan advocated rebellion, but he did feel that the theme of the original work was flawed. Other readers disapproved of Jin Shengtan's sympathy for the Shuihu band's attacks on neighboring villages,39 and Liu Tingji in his Zaiyuan zazhi (Zaiyuan's miscellaneous notes; published 1715), said of Jin Shengtan, "Although his talent was as vast as the ocean, the characters he approved of are brigands. In the end, the intention is the same as Sima Qian's 'Biography of the Wandering Knights"' (Lunzhu xuan 1: 382). The so-called Guben Shuihu zhuan (Ancient edition of the Shuihu zhuan) is a very special case. This 120-chapter version of the novel first surfaced in 1933 with prefatory material by Mei Jihe (1891-1969) claiming that the manuscript it was based on represented the entire novel as originally written by Shi Nai'an. 40 The first half is nothing but a reproduction of Jin Shengtan's version of the novel (without his commentary), and the second half continues the story in accord with the author's conception of Jin Shengtan's attitude toward the rebels. This time around, the Shuihu band members fight to the bitter end and proclaim themselves unambiguously on the side of egalitarianism and democracy. The idea that such a work could have been written before this century does not merit serious consideration, but the second half does represent a developed and concrete projection of one reading of Jin Shengtan's commentary on the novel. This brief historical survey should be adequate to indicate some of the diametrically opposed readings produced by Jin Shengtan's commentary edition of the Shuihu zhuan. What contradictions in the commentary might 39

E.g., Chen Chen, "Shuihu houzhuan lunliie," item 38, SHZZLHB 589. ]in Shengtan is not mentioned by name. ~° For a review of the controversy over this book, which was republished by Hebei renmin in 1985, see Ying Jian. The original prefatory material is also available in Shuihu yanjiu ziliao, pp. 242-79. Letters from Mei Jihe's son-in-law affirming that Mei was the real author of the book have been published in Zhang Guoguang, "'Wei zhong zhi wei.'"

40

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

be responsible for some of these divergent readings? Can they give us an idea of what Jin Shengtan really had in mind?

Contradictions in the Jin Shengtan Commentary Edition A recent reading of Jin Shengtan's work on the Shuihu zhuan treats his commentary as a reaction to inconsistencies in the original text (Widmer, Margins, p. 89). Although I certainly agree with this, there still remains the question whether he tried to iron out those inconsistencies mechanically, or whether he made use of them (and those in his own commentary) with a particular purpose in mind. One of the fifteen literary techniques Jin Shengtan pointed out in his dufa essay is mianzhen nici fa (the technique of needles wrapped in cotton and thorns hidden in the mud; SHZHPB 20, item 55; John Wang, "How to Read," pp. 141-42), and he saw subtle criticism (weici) directed toward Emperor Huizong in the novel. Here and elsewhere he stressed the existence of hidden messages at variance with the surface meaning. The reader was to keep these techniques in mind and apply them to sections of the text not explicated by Jin Shengtan. We do not need a deconstructionist to tell us that such overreading runs serious risks of undermining the very idea of stable meaning in the text. How much greater is the danger when the text is not one's own and most certainly came from several different hands? That we get so many straightforward readings of Jin Shengtan's commentary is somewhat of a mystery. Why do these readers not turn Jin Shengtan's method of reading hidden meaning into the text back onto his commentary? This is especially puzzling since Jin Shengtan considered his commentary version of the novel to be an organic whole rather than a mere conjunction of commentary and text, as is perhaps best illustrated in his total self-identification with the implied author that he constructed in the novel. On the other hand, we can consider Zhang Guoguang's overreading of the commentary as an application of Jin Shengtan's style of reading to Jin Shengtan's work. But the question remains: Are there clues in the commentary that indicate Jin Shengtan welcomed that kind of reading of his commentary? Given Jin Shengtan's self-identification with his implied author, his concern over the reader's "correct" understanding of the novel is bound up with concern over the reader's ability to understand his commentary "correctly." In the forged Shi Nai'an preface, Jin Shengtan's author shows concern over his present and future readers: "It is not the case that I do not want others to understand, but in the end, people just do not understand . . . . After I die, there will be no one who really knows how to read [my work]. ... How do I know what later readers will make of my work?"

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

41

(SHZHPB 24). The last line of the first of two concluding poems in Jin Shengtan's version (both composed by him using the persona of the implied author) alludes to the fifth poem of the "Nineteen Old Poems" ("Gushi shijiu shou"), which contains the couplet: "It's not that I pity the pain of the singer, I What moves me is the lack of those who understand the message [zhiyin ]" (Xiao Tong, 29 .1345). These hints, plus a similar statement at the end of the commentary (SHZHPB 70.1262, ic), are surely invitations to the reader to become Jin Shengtan's intimate friend (zhiyin). This theme of the difficulty of finding intimate friends (or rulers) who understand one's worth is a theme that Jin Shengtan identified as central to the novel itself. One strategy to alert the reader to ironic intention is excessive protestations of innocence. Someone buried 30 ounces of silver but was afraid that others would dig it up; so he wrote a sign over the place where the money was buried saying, "There is not 30 ounces of silver [buried] here." Whereas the silver hoarder in the story is a simpleminded fellow, we cannot say the same about Jin Shengtan; his disavowal of a political motivation behind the writing of the Shuihu zhuan in item 1 of his dufa essay is contradicted by even a superficial reading of the novel or his comments on it. Other of his statements that seem straightforward self-destruct on further examination. In his chapter comment for the prologue, Jin Shengtan "scolded" Mencius, the second most influential philosopher in the Confucian school, for approving Bo Yi's and Jiang Ziya's abandonment of the evil last ruler of the Shang dynasty (King Zhou): "It's not that I haven't heard that King Zhou was evil, but [as a ruler] he should not have been fled from. Although the seacoast is far away, 41 it is still part of King Zhou's domain. These two elders led others to abandon the old and run to the new. Although they were sages, their conduct was not of the highest" (SHZHPB P.38, cc). Their situations are obviously parallel to that of the Shuihu heroes, and the reference to Bo Yi and Jiang Ziya is part of a justification of the band's conduct, rather than a disagreement with Mencius. Jin Shengtan concluded that if even Mencius could commit errors of this kind (approval of Bo Yi and Jiang Ziya), what right do we have to be overly demanding when it comes to works of fiction? But is it a question of the commission of "errors"? In the first preface to his commentary, Jin Shengtan presented a long and involved argument claiming that ordinary people (shuren) have no right to write books (expressing their personal points of view) and that his commentary will be more effective than the fires of the book-burning Qin dy~~ The passage in the Mencius quoted from by Jin Shengtan says that Bo Yi fled to the shores of the North Sea and Jiang Ziya to the shore of the Eastern Sea (Mencius, IV A.13; Lau, p. 123).

42

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

nasty (221-207 B.C.) in eliminating such literature. 42 This is hard to take seriously. Jin Shengtan quotes Confucius who, he points out, was himself an example of a commoner presuming to write his own book: "When the way prevails under Heaven, commoners do not discuss public affairs." 43 Do not commoners' discussing public affairs and writing books reflect less on the presumption of the commoners (including Confucius) than on the government for having lost the way? This reminds us of another saying from the Lunyu, never directly quoted by Jin Shengtan but surely underlying his feigned displeasure with Mencius: "When the way prevails under Heaven, then show yourself; when it does not prevail, then hide" (Lunyu, VIII.13; Waley, Analects, p. 135). Finally, there is the use of the phrase Tianxia taiping, which occurs at the end of the prologue (Jin Shengtan removed two characters that split the phrase in twain; SHQZ 2.34n10) and at the end of the nightmare that concludes his version of the novel. In the first instance, the news that all is at peace is followed by a disclaimer added by Jin Shengtan: "But wait! If it was really true that there was then all peace and no trouble, then what would our novel relate today?" (SHZHPB P .50). Because these two assertions of peace in the empire are closely tied together by Jin Shengtan, negation of the first instance infects the second one, destroying the surface meaning that all is well in the world. In a similar move, Jin Shengtan negated the full force of his assertion in his dufa essay that the Shuihu zhuan has singled out Song Jiang for "extirpation" (jianjue; JHZHPB 15, item 2) by also speaking of the "extirpation" of the three Zhu brothers in the attack on the Zhu Clan Village by the Shuihu band (SHZHPB 46.868, cc).

Jin Shengtan-Archetypical Pingdian Commentator The popularity of the Jin Shengtan commentary editions of the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji was phenomenal in both China and Japan. 44 His style of commentary inspired scores of imitators, many of whom were not loath to acknowledge his influence. 45 42 For another positive reference to commentary as "burning books," see the Wugui shanren (pseud.) preface to the Zhang Xinzhi commentary to the Honglou meng, HLMJ 35-36 (M. Huang, "Author[ity ]," p. 55). 43 Lunyu, XVI.2 (translation from Waley, Analects, p. 204). Yi, here translated as "to discuss," was taken by Jin Shengtan more in the sense of "writing down one's opinions." 44 For Japan, see Chugi Suikoden kai (Explanation of the Zhongyi Shuihu zhuan), "Hanrei" (Editorial principles), in Towa jisho ruishu 3: 6; the prefatory matter to Takizawa Bakin's translation of the novel, Shinhen Suiko gaden; and Chapter 3 below. 45 Feng Zhenluan, "Du Liaozhai zashuo" (Random comments on reading Strange Tales from Liaozhat), dated 1818, Zhu Yixuan, Liaozhai, p. 585, said, "Jin Shengtan's commentaries on the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji are the product of a perceptive mind and miraculous expression, and they opened up countless vistas for those who came later, and let loose uncounted

]in Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

43

Jin Shengtan's influence on other fiction commentators spread first in his native Suzhou. A letter on Tang poetry from Jin Shengtan to Mao Zonggang has been preserved (JSTQJ 4: 56). When commenting on Tang "regulated verse" (liishi), Jin Shengtan used a controversial method of separating these eight-lined poems into two equal sections (jie). 46 In his edition of the Sanguo yanyi, Mao Zonggang not only followed this practice, he also quoted Jin Shengtan's commentary (without attribution) on the poems. 47 Although the "1644" preface to later editions of the Mao commentary is not by Jin Shengtan, 48 the creators of that preface sought to establish a direct line of transmission from him to Mao Zonggang and his father, Mao Lun. 49 The Maos got Li Yu to write a preface to their edition of the Sanguo yanyi, and the edition of that novel with commentary that appeared shortly thereafter under Li Yu's name borrows many comments and textual emendations from the Mao edition. Li Yu was acquainted with the father of Zhang Zhupo, the commentator on the fin Ping Mei, and visited the Zhang household in Xuzhou for a fairly extended period of time at least once. 50 Li Yu admired Jin Shengtan's efforts to promote vernacular literature, whatever their differences on the importance of performance versus literary qualities in dramatic texts. It seems quite certain that Li Yu wrote the notorious novel Rou putuan (Prayermat of flesh), and if he did not write the chapter comments for it, he probably collaborated in their production. Mao Lun and Mao Zonggang were connected to many of the more important literati of Suzhou and nearby cities. Both appear in Chu Renhuo's literary ideas." His method of commentary was also applied to the Zhuang Zi by Lin Yunming (fl. seventeenth c.), to the Zuozhuan by Feng Jihua and Lu Haotong (fl. 1720), and to the Shiji by Wu Jiansi (1621-80). On the relationship of these critics to Jin Shengtan, see the anonymous early twentieth-century essay "Du xinxiaoshuo fa," Lunzhu xuan, 2: 204, 210nn4-5. On Wu Jiansi in particular, see Liao Yan's (1644-1705) biography of Jin Shengtan, JSTXXJ 311. 46 You Tong (1618-1704) supposedly likened this practice to yaozhan ("decapitation" at the waist), and linked it, albeit in jest, to Jin Shengtan's own decapitation for his involvement at a protest at the Confucian Temple in Suzhou (Xu Li and Chen Yu, p. 309). 47 See, e.g., two poems by Du Fu on Zhuge Liang quoted after the latter's death, SGYYHPB 105.1286-88 and JSTQJ, 4: 595-96, 673-74. In the "Chongzhen" and Zhang Zhupo editions of the ]in Ping Mei, the opening poem is also divided into two jie. 48 The earliest Mao Sanguo yanyi edition has a preface signed and dated by Li Yu to the Chinese year that largely corresponds to 1679 but to an actual date that falls in early 1680. In later editions, 90 percent of the wording of this preface was kept, but Jin Shengtan's name and the 1644 date were added (see Rolston, How to Read, p. 149). For the text of this "1679" preface, see Chen Xianghua. ~ 9 The biography of Jin Shengtan by Liao Yan (JSTXXJ 311) lists Mao Zonggang as one of the people in the Suzhou region carrying on Jin Shengtan's work. 50 See Wu Gan, "Zhang Zhi," p. 96. Li Yu's collected works, Yijia yan, contains a pair of couplets (duilian) given to Zhang Zhupo's uncle, Zhang Dan, at the beginning of the Kangxi reign period (1662-1722). See Wu Gan, "Suokao," p. 88.

44

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

fianhu ji (Hard gourd collectanea). You Tong (1618-1704), who wrote a preface for the Maos' commentary on the Pipa ji, was extraordinarily active in literary circles-he was friends with Cao Yin (1658-1712; grandfather of Cao Xueqin) and with Zhang Chao (1650-ca. 1703), editor of another famous collectanea, Zhaodai congshu (Collectanea from this glorious age). Both You Tong and Zhang Zhupo added commentary to a book by Zhang Chao, Youmeng ying (Quiet dream visions). As for Zhang Zhupo, he compared his commentary to Jin Shengtan's several times. His brother and biographer quoted his explanation for the writing of his commentary: "The fin Ping Mei is a very finely constructed work, but since the death of Jin Shengtan there are few people alive who know about this. I am going to pick out all its fine points and make them manifest" (Zhang Daoyuan, "Zhongxiong Zhupo zhuan," JPMZLHB 212). In the fanli (editorial principles) section to his commentary, he contrasted his commentarial practice with Jin Shengtan's but attributed the main difference between them to the novels they commented on. 51 Several items at the end of Zhang Zhupo's dufa essay for the fin Ping Mei such as "The reader of the fin Ping Mei should keep a spittoon handy in order to have something to bang on" (JPMZLHB 45, item 94; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 241) are reminiscent of similarly lighthearted comments toward the end of Jin Shengtan's dufa essays for both the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiangji. 52 Jin Shengtan's commentary on the Xixiang ji, in particular its famous list of pleasurable things, is mentioned once in the Zhiyan zhai commentary on the Honglou meng, 53 and his name appears in two other places. It has been argued that these two comments are by Jihu sou and that he was using "Jin Shengtan" as a generic term for "fiction commentator" to refer to his dead friend and co-commentator, Zhiyan zhai. 54 The second of these reads: "Alas! the author is dead, Uin] Shengtan is also gone. Not daunted by my inadequacy, I deign to add a few lines of commentary. Whether the reader will understand or scorn me for this, I don't care." 55 51

JPMZLHB 1, item 2 (Roy, "Chang Chu-p'o's Commentary," p. 118). His description of the Shuihu zhuan is heavily dependent on Jin Shengtan's comments on that novel, particularly item 15 of his dufa essay, SHZHPB 17 (John Wang, "How to Read," pp. 134-35). 52 This style was also copied by later critics such as Zhu Lian (b. 1765) in item 21 of his "Mingzhai zhuren zongping" (General comments [on the Honglou meng] by the Owner of Bright Studio), JYY 27. 53 zyz 12.224, gengchen and Jing me, signed Jihu sou. On the list itself, see JSTXXJ 4.2.225229, pre-act comments, and John Wang, Chin Sheng-t'an, p. 27. 54 See Wu Enyu, pp. 295-96. For the comments themselves, see zyz 30.524, jiachen ic and 54.620, Wangfu and Youzheng post-chapter comments. 55 The penultimate phrase contains an allusion to a famous statement in Mencius (IIIB.9; Lau, p. 114) on Confucius and the Chunqiu (Spring and autumn annals). See Chapter 5 below for other references to this quotation from Mencius by fiction critics and authors.

]in Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

45

In the competitive world of pingdian commentary, the desire to present oneself as new and original conflicted with an equally strong desire to justify oneself by way of antecedents. Influences were purposefully covered up, but commentators also publicly paid their intellectual and stylistic debts. For example, Qasbuu (Chinese: Hasibao), author of an abbreviated translation of the Honglou meng into Mongolian said: "As for the one who could, while lying down, sort out the meaning of a piece of writing and, on rising, give an explication of literary technique, that was Mr. Jin Shengtan. As for the one who can imitate Jin Shengtan when reading fiction and informal history, and who can translate into Mongolian, that's me" (HLMZLHB 802, chap. 20, cc). Another example is Sun Songfu (1785?-1866), who in the preface to his commentary on the Honglou meng said, "My talent and my understanding are very deficient. How could I be able to peer into the depths of the author's mind? However, relying on what I have learned from Uin] Shengtan's books, using his leftovers, so to speak, and developing my own ideas, perhaps there will be some small fraction that will stand up to the work of my predecessors." 56 Given these concrete examples of commentators' looking up to Jin Shengtan as a model, claims that Jin Shengtan's ideas had little impact or development after him, as put forward by Maeno Naoaki (pp. 62, 64), are hard to accept. Besides his literary work, Jin Shengtan's personal lifestyle was also very important. He was an early example of a writer earning some portion of his livelihood from writing. Whether he was a Ming loyalist (yilao), and whether the self-portraits visible in such places as his forged Shi Nai'an preface are camouflage for subversive intentions, his image as a mental hermit in the midst of densely populated Suzhou appealed to premodern and modern Chinese alike. Obviously talented, he was another example of the worthy man failing to meet his true lord (huaicai bu yu), and this both contributed to his appeal and encouraged frustrated scholars to identify with him. For instance, even through the dark mirror of translation, Qasbuu's preface to his translation of the Honglou meng reveals an intimate connection with the fabricated Shi Nai'an preface and shows him identifying with both Jin Shengtan's lifestyle and his literary program (HLMZLHB 768-70).

The Influence of Jin Shengtan's Commentarial Habits Jin Shengtan's commentary is marked by several habitual traits, some identified as such by later writers, whereas others remained half-hidden because 56 See Liang Zuo, pp. 253-54. For a bibliographic description of this commentary, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 471-72.

46

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

of a lack of understanding of the circumstances that produced them. His style of commentary was criticized as tendentious and strained by some (see Takizawa Bakin's correspondence, in Mori Junsabur6, p. 47), but his habits were imitated by later pingdian commentators as appropriate to the genre of pingdian commentary writing. Perhaps most remarkable is the prominence of seemingly frivolous and irrelevant remarks in his commentary. Such remarks had appeared in earlier commentary editions of the Shuihu zhuan (Rolston, "Formal Aspects," pp. 69-70), but his commentaries far surpassed them in influence. An admirer of his wrote: As for fiction [xiaoshuo], it is no more than a thing for one's leisure time, to read after tea or wine. As for commentary on fiction, it is nothing more than the literary pastime of a scholar, with the scholar purposefully using cunning conceits. Neither has much worth to speak of. However, at the beginning of the Qing there was one Jin Shengtan who made a name for himself through his ability to comment on fiction. He listed the Sanguo yanyi, the Shuihu zhuan, the Xixiang ji, and the fin Ping Mei as books by and for geniuses [caizi shu], and revered them as marvelous works [qishu]. 57 Starting out with the psychology of a comical vision, he developed that into a playful and irreverent commentary that can make the reader laugh, make him ashamed, make him angry, or make him sorrowful. Thus, even up until the present day, [his commentary] continues to have great appeal. (HLMJ 327, Bianshan qiaozi, "Xuyan," Honglou mengfawei; 1916)

Jin Shengtan also inserted miscellaneous material into his commentaries, such as the list of pleasurable things in the Xixiang ji commentary already mentioned and the portrait of the ventriloquist in the pre-chapter comments to chapter 65 of the Shuihu zhuan commentary. Not everyone was inclined to indulge him as much as he indulged himself, however. A later printing of the Xixiang ji commentary kept only slightly more than half of the items in Jin Shengtan's dufa essay. 58 Zengpi xiuxiang Diliu caizi shu (Illustrated sixth work of genius with added commentary; preface 1720) contains anonymous marginal comments focused as much on Jin Shengtan's commentary as on the play. Concerning Jin Shengtan's introductory comments to the second act of the play, this commentator said: "To play with pen and ink in this manner is utterly worthless" (Diliu caizi Xixiang ji, 4/2b [110], me). Jin Shengtan's commentaries are also characterized by expedient remarks. To achieve a short-term goal, he was willing to present slanted or

57

The author is in error here. ]ianquan Diliu caizi shu shijie (Explicated commentary on the Sixth Work of Genius; 1669 preface) combines Jin Shengtan's commentary with one attributed to "Wu Wushan sanfu" (The three wives of Wu Wushan). 58

]in Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan"

47

biased arguments. For instance, in order to raise the status of the Shuihu zhuan, he made blanket criticisms of other novels, particularly the Xiyou ji (e.g., SHZHPB 16-17, df 6, 13; John Wang, "How to Read," pp. 132-33, 134). Such remarks upset later commentators on that novel, who took Jin Shengtan seriously (e.g., XYJZLHB 228, Zhang Shushen, Xinshuo Xiyou ji, "Zongpi," item 40), and Zhang Zhupo probably had Jin Shengtan in mind when he said: I have often noticed that those who write commentaries [pi] to any particular book often insist upon criticizing other books as a means of raising the status of the one they are concerned with .... If I were to write a work myself, I could not claim that once my work appeared, the other works in the world had ceased to be marvelous. Nor could I claim that there were not in the world any works more marvelous than mine. Why should one, then, when writing a commentary on any work, treat it as if it were one's own and feel the necessity to prove that no work in the world is its equal? This only reveals a selfish and narrow mind that would certainly be incapable of producing good writing. If one is incapable of writing well oneself, how can one comment on the good writing of others? (JPMZLHB 33, df35; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 221)

To brand Jin Shengtan as a "formalist" misses the boat because he often used "formalist" criticism as a cover to justify problematic aspects of his texts. Although many traditional commentators appreciated and emulated his discussions of literary technique, others with different agendas in mind dismissed that aspect of Jin Shengtan's work. Cai Yuanfang (fl. 1736-50) said: "As for the Jin Shengtan commentaries on the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji, they are of benefit to students, but if they are of benefit, it is only toward the learning of methods of composition." This he contrasted with the "solid learning" (shixue) to be obtained from his commentary (Dong Zhou Lieguo zhi, df 16; Lunzhu xuan, 1: 415). Yannan Shangsheng claimed that the excision in his commentary on the Shuihu zhuan of Jin Shengtan's comments on literary style was no great loss, because the original text of the novel was still there for the reader to appreciate by himself (items 1-2 of the fanli for his commentary, Ma Tiji, Shuihu ziliao, p. 48). Li Yu criticized what he saw as Jin Shengtan's complete faith in authorial intentionality,59 and others equated Jin Shengtan's publication of the mysteries of writing to the exposure of heavenly secrets and spoke of his early death as punishment for such presumption (see the Liao Y an biography, JSTXXJ 311).

59 "Does he Uin Shengtan] know that besides the places where the author wrote with such an intention [youxin] that there are also places where it is not completely a matter of intention?" (Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Tianci yulun," p. 104).

48

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

False Attributions of Commentaries to Jin Shengtan In Jin Shengtan's list of "six works by and for geniuses," only the last twothe Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji-are works of vernacular literature. 60 Their commentaries were the only ones on vernacular literature he ever produced, but the notion that he wrote commentaries on other novels came into existence very early and has persisted. Perhaps because of the forged "Jin Shengtan" preface found in all but the original edition of the Maos' Sanguo yanyi, and despite statements in that preface that only illness had prevented the "I" of the document from writing a commentary on the novel, attribution of a commentary on the Sanguo yanyi to Jin Shengtan has been very common. Some of this is perhaps nothing more then innocent misunderstanding, but some later editions of the novel display deliberate obfuscation. Although some of these editions attribute the entire commentary to Jin Shengtan on their title pages (e.g., the 1820 Yong'an tang reprint in the Gest Oriental Library, Princeton University), it was more common to divide the attribution between Jin Shengtan and Mao Zonggang or his father. For instance, the "original commentary" (yuanping) might be credited to Jin Shengtan, and additional commentary and punctuation (pidian) to Mao Lun. 61 Sometimes the chapter comments are prefixed by the same heading used in Jin Shengtan's Shuihu zhuan commentary: "Shengtan waishu" (Uncollected work by Jin Shengtan; e.g., the 1890 Shanghai shuju ed.). Such deliberate attempts to connect Jin Shengtan to a Sanguo yanyi commentary are at least partly responsible for the talk of a Jin Shengtan commentary on the Sanguo yanyi by modern scholars who should know better62 or modern reprints that still include Jin Shengtan's name (e.g., Dazi zuben Sanguo zhi yanyi). Combined editions of the Shuihu zhuan and the Sanguo yanyi also falsely claimed to include Jin Shengtan's commentary on the latter. 63 Stranger still, perhaps, is an abridged edition of the Shuihu zhuan presented as a collaboration between Li Zhi and Jin Shengtan (see Ma Tiji, Shuihu shulu, p. 35).

60 Laura Wu (p. 253) argues that the liu caizi shu formed a reading program that moved from the easier vernacular texts to harder ones in the classical language. 61 The title page for such an edition is included in the appendix in Wu Jianli, "Sanguo yanyi." Its title, Guanhua tang Diyi caizi shu (The first work of genius from Guanhua tang), imitates the titles of some editions of the Jin Shengtan Shuihu zhuan commentary. 62 See, e.g., Lu Xun, "Tan Jin Shengtan" (On Jin Shengtan); and Yu Zhongshan, pp. 14748. Lu Xun does not repeat this mistake in his Zhongguo xiaoshuo shiliie (A brief history of Chinese fiction). 63 See the descriptions of the Xingxian tang, Wenyuan tang, Fuwen tang, and Youwen tang combined editions in Ma Tiji, Shuihu shulu, pp. 21, 31, 33.

fin Shengtan and the "Shuihu zhuan,

49

Several editions of the Xiyou ji, which Jin Shengtan disparaged so out-ofhand, have his name on their title pages. The Huaide tang reprint with added commentary of the Xiyou zhengdao shu (The way to enlightenment through the Xiyou ji) by Cai Yuanfang has the words "Shengtan waishu" horizontally across the top of the title page. This might explain the linkage of Cai Yuanfang and Jin Shengtan by Liu Yiming (1734-after 1820) in his first preface to his commentary on the novel (XYJZLHB 244-45). Some editions claim on their title pages to have "added comments" (jiaping) by Jin Shengtan, but nothing of the sort can be found inside. 64 Most audacious of all must be an edition published by the Shide tang that claims to include commentary by Jin Shengtan, Wang Xiangxu, Chen Shibin (fl. 1696), and Li Zhi, but is totally devoid of commentary of any sort except for a brief excerpt from the Xiyou zhengdao shu after the last chapter (a copy is held in the Peking University Library). The ]in Ping Mei is also one of the so-called "four great marvelous books" (si da qishu), and it too appeared in editions claiming to have commentary by Jin Shengtan. Two examples purport to be Zhang Zhupo's "original edition" with Jin Shengtan's comments. 65 Again, these editions surely explain scattered references to commentary editions of the fin Ping Mei by Jin Shengtan. 66

Jin Shengtan's Reputation in the Twentieth Century In the 1920s, when editions of traditional novels first began to appear with Western-style punctuation, those editions usually contained another innovation-the absence of traditional pingdian commentary. The first such edition for the Shuihu zhuan retained the 70-chapter length but removed Jin Shengtan's commentary. This was loudly praised by Hu Shi in his preface for the edition, in which he disparaged Jin Shengtan for reeking of "eightlegged essays" and N eo-Confucianism, withering terms of abuse at that

64

These are usually reprints of Chen Shibin's commentary on the novel (original title: Xiyou zhenquan [The true explication of the Xiyou ji]). An examplar is described in Liu Cunren, Lundun, pp. 52-53. 65 The title page of one is included in the illustrations to Liu Hui, Chengshu (number 13), and another in small format claims to have been published by the Yingsong xuan but is different from their better-known large-format edition. 66 See "Yunhe xuan zazhu" (Miscellaneous works from Yunhe Studio; anonymous, 1821), Zhu Yixuan and Liu Yuchen, ]in Ping Mei ziliao, p. 362. In a different work, "fin Ping Mei kaozheng" (A critical study of the fin Ping Mei; 1794), Wang Zhongqu speaks of long postchapter comments falsely attributed to Jin Shengtan, JPMZLHB 472. Gao Mingcheng, fin Ping Mei yu fin Shengtan (The fin Ping Mei and Jin Shengtan), has gone so far as to argue that Jin Shengtan was the author of the fin Ping Mei.

50

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

time. 67 Jin Shengtan and a certain conception of his lifestyle were championed by writers such as Lin Yutang and Zhou Zuoren (1884-1969), and disagreement over that lifestyle became part of a larger fight between them and Lu Xun. Given Lu Xun's influence on literary studies in the People's Republic of China, the harsh portrait of Jin Shengtan as a slave and a lackey in his essays seriously impeded a more nuanced approach to him until recently. The efforts of modern partisans of Jin Shengtan such as Zhang Guoguang have gone far toward effecting a more positive, if not very realistic, evaluation of him. Scholars in Taiwan and the United States outside this discourse have tended to criticize Jin Shengtan's style of criticism as failing to meet Western standards, 68 or to assert, on the contrary, that there are similarities between his work and New Criticism (e.g., John Wang, Chin Sheng-t'an, pp. 51-52, and Chen Wanyi, fin Shengtan). For the purposes of this book, however, we will be less concerned with the "real" Jin Shengtan than with the effect his work and example had on later commentators and authors. 67

See Hu Shi, "Shuihu," pp. 1, 4. For a more reasoned consideration of the influence of the examination essays on Jin Shengtan, see Lu Qingbin. We have long known that Jin Shengtan complied collections of examination essays with commentary, but only recently has one of these come to light (see Mei Qingji). 68 Among the eight faults that he finds with Jin Shengtan's style of criticism, Chen Xiang ("Part 1," p. 45) lists the following: preferen"';:e for subjective exclamations, distortion of the original author's intentions, irresponsibility, willful misrepresentation, and desire for originality at the expense of the original work.

2 Dealing with fin Shengtan and the Rest of the "Four Masterworks"

The Maos, Li Yu, and the Sanguo yanyi We have already noted some of the connections between Mao Zonggang and Jin Shengtan. Both were natives of the Suzhou region, and they corresponded with each other. Contemporaries described Mao Zonggang as a follower of Jin Shengtan, 1 and publishers worked Jin Shengtan's name into editions of the Mao Sanguo yanyi commentary. If the original edition had a literary patron, however, it was Li Yu, who wrote a preface for it dated 1680. 2 Whether the commentary on that novel attributed to Li Yu appeared before or after Li Yu's death, it pays the Maos the compliment of borrowing from their textual revisions and comments. The first commentary published by Mao Zonggang and Mao Lun, Diqi caizi shu (The seventh work of genius; prefaces 1665 and 1666), was on the Pipa ji. This commentary avoids mentioning Jin Shengtan even as it borrows his system of numbered "works of genius" for its title. 3 The commentary is unusual in that it includes a selection of comments on the play by earlier critics, because, according to Mao Lun, "If one looks at the comments by the various gentlemen in the past, one will know that my praise of the Pipa ji today is not without foundation. Also, if one looks at the comments of the various gentlemen in the past, then one will know that my comments take an entirely different approach, and I have not dared to 1 See Liao Yan's biography of Jin Shengtan, JSTXXJ 311. The twentieth-century critic Xie Tao later referred to Mao Zonggang's father, Mao Lun, less politely as Jin Shengtan's "echobug" (yingsheng chong) (Xiaoshuo hua [Talks on fiction; 1919], Lunzhu xuan, 2: 473). 2 The preface is commonly dated to 1679, but the month given actually fell in 1680. See Chang and Chang, p. 126n152. 3 The preface by You Tong not only omits Jin Shengtan from the list of famous commentators (which includes Mao Lun), but also directly contradicts Jin Shengtan on the "continuations" of the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji he attributed to Luo Guanzhong and Guan Hanqing (ca. 1240-ca.1320), respectively. In his own preface, Mao Lun refers to Jin Shengtan only as the "preface writer" to the Shuihu zhuan. See PPJZLHB 273, 276.

52

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

copy from my predecessors" (PPJZLHB, "Zonglun," p. 276). This seems to show both an awareness of and a desire to challenge the common practice of appropriating earlier comments as one's own. Although modern critics were negative toward Mao Zonggang and the commentary on the Sanguo yanyi until the past decade, 4 when he benefited from the reappraisal of Jin Shengtan, earlier critics and readers reacted more favorably. Just as with the Jin Shengtan edition of the Shuihu zhuan, the Mao edition of the Sanguo yanyi went through many printings and drove its rivals into obscurity. 5 Earlier Commentaries on the "San guo yanyi"

The earliest datable edition of the novel (1522) contains double-columned interlinear comments, most of which are informational, not interpretive. 6 Some believe that the comments were written by the author of the noveF Others hold them (and some of the poetry in the edition) more likely to be the work of the author of the 1522 preface, Zhang Shangde, and part of an attempt to raise the historical respectability of the novel. 8 Many scholars now believe that although the 1522 edition is the earliest extant dated text, a line of texts with the title Sanguo zhi zhuan is actually older. 9 In any case, some narratorial comments found in Sanguo zhi zhuan editions appear as double-columned comments in the 1522 edition. 10 4 It is clear that the Sanguo yanyi commentary was the joint effort of Mao Lun and his son (see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 146-48), but the general practice is to give credit to Mao Zonggang alone. 5 In a 1734 preface to the combined Mao-Li Yu edition of the novel (for bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 438-39), Huang Shuying said that whereas Li Zhi had pointed out problems with the language of the novel (i.e., in the 120-chapter "Li Zhi" edition), Mao Lun's work on it enabled it to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji (SGYYZLHB 490-91). The aborted translation of the novel into French by Nghien T oan and Louis Ricard (Les trois royaumes; 1958- ) included the Maos' chapter comments, although they attributed the editing of the novel to Jin Shengtan. 6 For bibliographic description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 430-31. For examples of interpretive comments, see Li Weishi, pp. 315-16; and McLaren, "Ming Chantefables," pp. 22021. 7 See Li Weishi, p. 314, where Yuan Shishuo, Zhang Peiheng, Zhang Guoguang, and Ouyang Jian are listed as adherents of this theory. 8 Li Weishi and Wang Liqi are of this opinion (ibid.). They argue that the comments cannot be by the author because they repeat material in the text, point out "sources" unnecessarily, destroy suspense, and contradict the text (ibid.). Li Weishi also presents the judgment of a historical linguist, Ning Jifu, that the 170-plus phonetic glosses and the use of dialect in the commentary make Zhang Shangde a distinct possibility for their author (ibid., p. 316). The commentary itself shows that the text was edited for the 1522 version (ibid., p. 314; see also McLaren, "Chantefables," pp. 219-21). 9 Liu Ts'un-yan, Anne McLaren, Zhang Ying, and Chen Su, among others, hold this view. McLaren is even skeptical about the 1522 date ("Ming Chantefables," pp. 31-33). 10 See McLaren, "Chantefables," p. 220; and Liu Cunren, "Luo Guanzhong," pp. 182, 184 (examples 12, 16, and 38).

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

53

Other early commentaries on the Sanguo yanyi are also mostly informational or supplemental in nature. 11 Different from these is the 120-chapter commentary attributed to Li Zhi and probably published in the 1620s. It retains many of the earlier interlineal comments, but adds marginal and post-chapter comments, almost certainly by Ye Zhou. 12 The commentary downplays the fictional elements of the text, treating it sometimes as simply a work of history. The earlier 240-item (ze) division of the text has begun to yield to the later 120-chapter format, but the process is not yet complete. Both trends are continued in the Mao commentary edition of the novel. Although the Maos are greatly beholden to Jin Shengtan, they are less indebted to earlier commentaries on their novel than he was to the work of his predecessors on the Shuihu zhuan. 13 Developing fin Shengtan 's Model

Besides extensive commentary, the Maos' Sanguo yanyi also contains numerous textual emendations and revisions. There are both similarities and differences in Jin Shengtan's and the Maos' style of revision, but the main difference is one of scale. The Maos had no problem with the narrative stance in the Sanguo yanyi; they merely wished to strengthen it. Accordingly, there saw no need for major surgery, and although they completed the transition from ze (sections) to hui (chapters), they cut no major episode from the original. They attributed all their changes, however, to an "ancient text" of the novel. 14Although they said all the variants adopted in 11

These include the Zhou Yuejiao (fl. 1583-1628) 1591 edition, the two Yu Xiangdou editions, two editions with commentary attributed to Li Zhi (one "original edition" and one based on the Yu Xiangdou editions), and the Yingxiong pu edition {ca. 1620). For bibliographical descriptions, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 431-32, 434. 12 For a bibliographical description and information on Y e Zhou and this edition, see ibid., pp. 432-33, 357. A reprocessed version was published under the name of Zhong Xing (ibid., pp. 433-34). The relationship between these two editions is similar to that between the Rongyu tang and "Zhong Xing" commentaries on the Shuihu zhuan. 13 Their textual emendations and comments were sometimes made in reaction to comments in the "Li Zhi" commentary. In most cases, the Maos addressed complaints about the text or characterization in the earlier commentary {see Chapter 8 below). In item 6 of their fanli {SGYYHPB 20), they both distanced their work from the "Li Zhi" commentary and cast doubt on its attribution to him. 14 In the Pipa ji commentary {PPJZLHB 286-87, "Zonglun"), Mao Lun described his relationship to the novel: "Formerly Mr. Luo Guanzhong composed the Tongsu Sanguo zhi [Popularized Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms] in 120 juan . ... But his book was changed for the worse by village know-it-alls .... Two years ago I got the chance to read a copy of the original text [yuan ben]. I edited and collated it, and despite my inadequacies, divided the text into sections." Some scholars take the Maos at their word (see Zhang Ying and Chen Su, pp. 38-39). The Maos also attributed their (rather minor) changes in the text of the Pipa ji to an ancient edition, although their text is actually much closer to the "Li Zhi" and "Chen Jiru" versions than to the extant Yuan dynasty version.

54

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

their edition came from this "ancient edition," the Maos provided a classified list of their revisions in their fanli to the commentary. Item one treats one of the bugbears of the 120-chapter "Li Zhi" commentary. 15 The earlier commentator had complained about the incorrect use of literary particles (zhi hu zhe ye) in the novel, and the Maos tried to rectify this problem. In his Shuihu zhuan, Jin Shengtan cut all the poems and descriptive passages in parallel prose quoted by the narrator except those that begin and end the text. Earlier editions of the Sanguo yanyi end with a long ancientstyle poem (gufeng), but begin very abruptly: "Emperor Huan of the Latter Han died and Emperor Ling ascended the throne. At the time he was 12 years old [Chinese count]" (Luo Guanzhong, juan 1, p. 1). The Maos retained the poem at the end of the work (with minor changes) but added a ci poem and a short prose introduction at the beginning that draws the reader's attention to patterns of historical flux and the causes for the disorder at the end of the Latter Han dynasty (25-220) and in the Three Kingdoms period (220-65) that form the subject of the novel (SGYYHPB 1.1-2). The Maos were not as radical as Jin Shengtan in excising poetry quoted by the narrator, but they did streamline their edition by removing some of this material. Descriptive passages in parallel prose are not prominent in the early versions of the Sanguo yanyi, but mutually contradictory poems on history (yongshi shi) by the famous and the not-so-famous and historians' encomiums (zan) stacked on top of each other are. The Maos cut the majority of the zan but do not mention this in their fanli. They did, however, voice concern over anachroni;tic quotation of regulated verse by preTang persons in the novel, but that involves poems presented mimetically, a category not removed by Jin Shengtan. In item 8 of the fanli, the Maos expressed particular displeasure with the poetry of Zhou Li (hao Jingxuan, fl. 1498) and his ilk. Zhou Li was a scholar and author of popular historical texts; some early editions of the novel contain as many as 70 or more of his poems on historical themes (Liu Xiuye, pp. 66-67). In the fanli the Maos noted that they had substituted famous Tang and Song poems for inferior poetry in the novel, one of their few open admissions of doctoring the text. They cut some poems, however, because they expressed political opinions at odds with theirs. 16 The earlier editions of the Sanguo yanyi are studded with historical documents such as memorials and letters. The Maos cut, substituted, and sometimes even added this type of material according to two basic principles: historical authenticity and literary merit. They applied the same prin15 Judging from this and other items in the fanli, the Maos used a copy of the 120-chapter "Li Zhi" edition as their base text. 16 For instance, poems by Wang Lang and Zhong You flattering Cao Cao (cf. Luo Guanzhong,juan 12, pp. 533-34, and SGYYHPB 56.687-97).

Dealing with fin Shengtan

55

ciples in revising the accounts of individual incidents in the novel as well (SGYYHPB 20, fanli, items 2-4), although the Maos show some embarrassment when literary merit occasionally got priority over historical accuracy. The elimination of some of this quoted material can also be attributed to a desire to streamline the text. Although they claim all these changes are based on the "ancient text," they sometimes cite historical texts to buttress their arguments. There is a concerted effort in the Mao edition to make characterization more consistent. Although the Maos are often criticized for taking this too far and either stereotyping characters or turning them into idealized figures, Jin Shengtan also stressed consistency of characterization in his Xixiang ji, and a connection between the two is possible. The Maos' desire to clearly separate the good from the bad has detrimental effects, some of which, such as the resulting appearance of hypocrisy on the part of Liu Bei, are precisely the opposite of what they clearly intended. It would, however, be unfair to think that they wanted to make their characters wholly onedimensional. Their refusal to clean up troubling aspects of Guan Yu's personality is but one example. There is a continuity of interest in literary structure and technique from Jin Shengtan to the Maos. Although they generally avoided Jin Shengtan's names for literary techniques, their list of techniques has many similarities to Jin's. It is true that the Maos ascribed their marvelous literary techniques to nature or the Creator of All Things (Zaowuzhe)/ 7 as opposed to Jin Shengtan's all-powerful author, but that difference probably relates more to the Maos' realization that they were dealing with a genre quite different from that of the Shuihu zhuan-the historical novel. The Maos' suspicion of Cao Cao's every move, along with their determination to reveal his "inner secrets," also appears to be borrowed from Jin Shengtan. Although the positions Song Jiang and Cao Cao hold in the early editions of their respective novels were very different, much of the dynamics of their treatment by Jin Shengtan and the Maos is very similar (see Chapter 8 below). Some Problems Concerning Mao Lun and Mao Zonggang

Mao Zonggang and his father are perhaps less attractive than most traditional Chinese fiction critics because of their insistence on moral uprightness in the works they commented on and their belief in a moral order in the universe reflected in those works. This prevents them from dealing

17

For their conception of the novel as a "natural text" and Zaowuzhe as its real author, see Bailey, pp. 43-120; for a comparison to Jin Shengtan's practice, see L. Wu, chap. 2.

56

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

with the anti-traditional and heterodox aspects of fiction and drama. 18 Let us look first at their commentary on the Pipa ji. The Pipa ji is a very ambiguous play. The current version of the story dates to Gao Ming (d. 1359) and is his attempt to rewrite traditional material. In earlier treatments (and in some later local opera traditions) the male lead, Cai Bojie, is treated as a villain who abandons his parents and wife for a better life in the capital with a new wife and her powerful family. He is eventually struck by lightning for his sins. Gao Ming changed a minimum of the plot elements (except for the electrocution of the hero), but completely re-evaluated Cai Bojie. His hero is a filial son and loyal spouse forced to act against his wishes. This violent transformation left "fault lines" in the finished product similar to the disjunctions found in the Shuihu zhuan, but the Maos' reaction to this problem varied greatly from Jin Shengtan's. Jin Shengtan and the Maos, however, did not differ in their desire to construct an implied author to hold their works together. The Maos' way of reaching this goal was quite reductionist. They accepted the popular account that Gao Ming wrote the play to criticize the conduct of a friend of his, Wang the Fourth, a theory supposedly proven by the four "Wang" elements in the first two characters of the title of the play. 19 The Maos explained away anomalies in the Pipa ji as the result of the author's "extratextual" need to criticize his friend through the use of a traditional story. The idea of using the Pipa ji to ureach morality is not a figment of the Maos' imaginations-such a concern is a part of the rhetoric of the play from the opening remarks in the first scene to the imperial sanction of Cai Bojie's bigamy in the last one. The Sanguo yanyi is similarly involved with moral choices, and its heroes, Liu Bei and his partisans, had the sanction of the most influential figure in Neo-Confucianism, Zhu Xi. It was Zhu Xi who most ardently advocated awarding political legitimacy to the Shu-Han kingdom (220-63) founded by Liu Bei, rather than the Wei kingdom (22065) established by Cao Cao and his son. The Maos refer several times to Zhu Xi's Tongjian gangmu (Outline and explanation of The Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government) as support for their interpretation of the novel (e.g., SGYYHPB 4-5, df1; trans. Roy, "Romance," pp. 152-56). Just as literal truth could be disregarded in order to make a moral point in the Chunqiu (see Chapter 5 below), the Maos' concept of history centers on the 18 They are also perhaps the least likely to see irony in their texts. "Irony is an important feature of the earliest extant edition of the novel [i.e., the 1522 edition], but was largely eliminated in the revision now unfortunately regarded as the "standard" edition [i.e., the Mao edition]" (Kimlicka, p. v). 19 See Mao Lun, Diqi caizi shu, "Zonglun," PPJZLHB 276-78. For other pre-modem writers on the Pipa ji and Wang the Fourth, see Jiang Ruizao, pp. 20-21.

Dealing with fin Shengtan

57

lessons it can convey to the reader rather than on the transmission of facts, however much they complain about ahistorical matter in the early editions of the Sanguo yanyi. Statements like the following are frequent: "Sima Zhao's failure to be killed is not a case of Heaven caring for the Sima clan. It is because there remains a marvelous and spectacular scene later in the novel that Heaven desires to preserve the Sima clan so that they can play their part, in order to provide a warning to disloyal subjects and rebels for ages to come" (SGYYHPB 109.1329, cc). The future event requiring the Simas is their usurpation of the Wei dynasty in 265. According to the Maos, "The fact that the state of Wei was founded by an act of usurpation and suffered retribution [bao] in the form of a like act of usurpation by the founder of the Jin dynasty serves as a warning to future generations" (SGYYHPB 86, df 8; translation by Roy, "Romance," p. 166). Mention of like uses of "retribution" by Heaven abound in the Maos' commentary, giving the impression that Heaven controls history primarily with an eye toward the effect on future generations. Recent attempts to lend Mao Zonggang and his father a subversive cast try to paint them as anti-Manchu patriots. The cornerstone of this argument is the idea that all the fuss in the commentary over denying the Wei dynasty title to the legitimate succession (zhengtong) is directed toward the Qing dynasty. It has been pointed out that, like Cao Cao, Nurhaci (15591626) was once an official of the dynasty (the Ming) that his descendants overthrew (Xiong Du, p. 43), and early Qing writers who compared the situation of the Southern Ming (1644-62) with Liu Bei's Shu-Han state sometimes lost their heads because of Qing touchiness on this subject (Xiong Du, p. 43; Du Guichen, p. 281). Others see the Maos' criticism of eunuch influence in government as a reference to the power of eunuchs in the late Ming (Xiao Xiangkai, "Mao ping"). If there was an anti-Manchu aspect to the Maos' commentary, we would expect them to cover their tracks carefully because of the severe consequences of not doing so. Parts of the commentary can be read as implying an analogy between the Three Kingdoms period and the Ming-Qing transition, but these analogies (if in fact intended by the Maos) are never made explicit. For instance, the discussion of legitimate succession in the dufa essay avoids mention of foreign dynasties such as the Yuan, Liao, or Jin. The clearest reference to the Yuan dynasty in the commentary is interesting. The Jiang Wei (202-64) of the novel is compared (SGYYHPB 119.1431, cc) to the Song officials Zhang Shijie (d. 1279), Wen Tianxiang (1236-83), and Lu Xiufu (1238-79) after the fall of the Southern Song capital, Lin'an, to the invading Mongols. These officials set up a court in exile in Fujian in order to better resist the Mongols. A similar situation occurred after the loss of Beijing and the suicide of the Chongzhen emperor in 1644, when rump

58

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

states were set up in Nanjing, Fujian, and the southwest, the last of which persisted until 1662. The only other likely reference to the Ming-Qing transition is the defense by the Maos of a false surrender by Zhou Fang involving the cutting off of his hair (SGYYHPB 96.1171-72), which is said to recall both the Qing law that Chinese shave off the front part of their hair and the use of false surrenders by resistors to Qing rule (Ye W eisi and Mao Xin, pp. 347-48). The paucity of the evidence, however, speaks for itself.2° The influence of the Maos' edition of the Sanguo yanyi on later fiction composition was surely limited by their presentation of the novel as inimitable, naturally produced almost without human agency, and sui generis. Yet there is no doubt they affected later commentators-even though their commentary was sometimes misattributed to Jin Shengtan by those who imitated them. 21 The Maos' particular take on the historical novel was carried to an extreme by Cai Yuanfang in his commentary edition of the Lieguo zhi (see Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 475-76). Although admiration for the didacticism of their commentaries was not universal then or today, it probably won them their greatest imitator, Takizawa Bakin. Besides being perhaps the most prolific and prominent novelist of the Edo period (1603-1867), Bakin also made the most use of Chinese vernacular fiction and commentary (see Chapter 3 below). Mao Lun himself was well enough known to be mentioned in a conversation in a later novel. It is not in connection with his most famous commentary that his name crops up, however. Instead, the reference is to a rather idle remark in the Pipa ji commentary about writing plays that reverse history (Chen Sen 24.336). The Fiction and Drama Criticism of Li Yu The 1680 edition of the Mao Sanguo yanyi commentary has a preface signed by Li Yu praising the novel and Mao Lun's commentary. According to this preface, Li Yu gave the novel the title "First Work of Genius" (Diyi caizi shu). Since the preface also says that Li Yu's son-in-law Shen Yinbo brought the commentary to him, it is hard to know whether Li Yu and Mao Lun were personally acquainted. 22 Shortly thereafter, the Jiezi yuan, a publish20 Mao Zonggang's collected writings have not survived. It has long been known that Mao Zonggang wrote a colophon for the portrait of a Ming loyalist, Jin Yuyin (Huang Zhongmo, p. 294). A previously unknown colophon by him for another Ming loyalist was recently published (Chen Xianghua, pp. 209-10). 21 The Sun Songfu commentary on the Honglou meng, dated 1829, has a section that copies the rhetoric and phrasing of the Mao dufa essay to the Sanguo yanyi, which it attributes to Jin Shengtan (Liang Zuo, pp. 267-68). 22 It is possible that the largely tongue-in-cheek attributions of some of the more fantastic aspects of Li Yu's fiction to the Zaowuzhe rather than the author by the narrator in his stories might have influenced the less anthropomorphic use of the term in the Mao commentary on

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

59

ing house founded by Li Yu but out of his hands by then, brought out a new printing of the novel with a preface and commentary attributed to Li Yu. Its authenticity remains doubtful, but the 1680 preface to the Mao edition is probably by him. Li Yu and Wang Wangru were friends (Wang Wangru wrote comments for Li Yu's essays on history, Shilun), and both the latter's commentary on the Shuihu zhuan (1657) and the 1680 Mao edition of the Sanguo yanyi were published by the same house, Zuigeng tang. Li Yu's assessment of Jin Shengtan's work on the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji was generally favorable. 23 His acquaintance with the father of Zhang Zhupo and connections to the grandfather and great-grandfather of Cao Xueqin24 certainly strengthened his influence on them in their fiction criticism and composition (see Hu Xiaowei). Li Yu's name appears on the title pages of some editions of Zhang Zhupo's commentary on the fin Ping Mei, and some scholars have proposed that he was involved in the preparation of the "Chongzhen" version of that novel and its commentary. 25 In the Zhiyan zhai commentary on the Honglou meng, Li Yu and his writing are compared to aspects of that novel (e.g., ZYZ 9.201, Wangfu and Youzheng versions me). However, from not long after his death up until quite recently, Li Yu enjoyed a far better reputation in Japan than in China (Chang and Chang, chap. 1). He was another favorite of Takizawa Bakin's, who modeled one of his cognomens on one of Li Yu's (Zolbrod, p. 48). Li Yu was a practicing writer of fiction. In the 1650s, he wrote two collections of short stories, Wusheng xi (Silent operas) and Shi'er lou (The twelve towers), both of which carry commentaries of modest scale under the name of his friend, Du Jun. The stories in Wusheng xi are shorter and unitary, whereas all but one of the stories in Shi'er lou are multi-chapter

the Sanguo yanyi. See Chapters 4 and 12 below. Li Yu opposed the "Wang the Fourth" interpretation of the Pipa ji used by the Maos (Li Liweng quhua, "Jie fengci," pp. 14-15). 23 The chapters on drama in Li's Xianqing ouji mention ]in Shengtan several times, and a reference to the Shuihu zhuan is clearly to Jin Shengtan's conception of that novel. See Li Liweng quhua, "Ji tiansai" (Avoid stuffing in allusions), p. 48 (praises Jin Shengtan for raising the status of fiction and drama); "Tianci yulun," pp. 103-4 (praises Jin Shengtan's Xixiang ji commentary for his ability to understand the author and the comprehensiveness of his comments, but faults him for treating the play as reading material rather than drama and for down playing inspiration); and "Yu qiu xiaosi" (Strive for likeness in dialogue), p. 86 (praises the characterization in the Shuihu zhuan). 24 See Mao and Liu, p. 15, and Hanan, Invention, p. 215n27 (on Cao Xueqin's greatgrandfather, Cao Xi); and Spence, p. 68 (on Li Yu's friend Du Jun's connection to Cao Xueqin's grandfather, Cao Yin). 25 See Liu Hui, "Lun Xinke fin Ping Mei"; idem, "Li Yu"; and idem, "fin Ping Mei yanjiu," pp. 368-73. The main evidence is a poem in an edition held in the Capital Library in Beijing signed Hui daoren, a name once used by Li Yu, as well as similarities in dialect. This theory is discounted by Wu Gan, "Suokao," p. 88; and Wang Rumei, "Li Yu."

60

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

and experiment with this hybrid form. 26 Both collections are characterized by the ironic use of storyteller conventions, the incorporation of discursive sections, and the use of a more personalized narrator closer to the projected persona of Li Yu as implied author than is usual in earlier vernacular stories (see Chapters 4, 9, and 12 below). Li Yu also wrote dramatic versions of plot material from his short stories, 27 and as the title of his first collection of stories indicates, he was fond of a certain playful blurring of the generic boundaries between drama and fiction. 28 His fictional and dramatic writings show a constant fascination with parallelism and balance at both the micro (sentence) and macro (overall structure) levels, and in the structuring of stories into parallel pairs in the first Wusheng xi collection (Rolston, "Review Article," pp. 62-63). All the features that characterize Li Yu's short stories appear also in the Rou putuan, a fairly short novel published under a pseudonym but attributed to Li Yu at the beginning of the 1700s by Liu Tingji. 29 Because of ini26 The first printing of Wusheng xi contained twelve stories. A second collection (Wusheng xi erjt) with from six to twelve stories appeared shortly after. An anthology of twelve stories selected from both collections was edited by Du J un and published under the title Wusheng xi heji (Combined edition of the Wusheng xt). Six stories left out of that collection were later added as a supplement, and the whole lot was published under the name Liancheng hi (Priceless jade). A possible connection between the publication of Wusheng xi erji and the fall of Zhang Jinyan, lieutenant governor of Zhejiang from 1654 to 1658, might account for the fact that no exemplars of that collection have survived. See Hanan, Invention, pp. 21-22; Jiang Jurong; and Huang Qiang, "Wusheng xi," pp. 41-43 (he*argues, however, that Zhang was involved with both Wusheng xi collections). Although short when compared to the Shi'er lou stories, the Wusheng xi stories are fairly long for single-chapter stories. This is especially true of the six stories in Liancheng hi from the second collection. An anthology of four of the stories published in the eighteenth century under the same title as the original collection contains an embryonic movement toward division into chapters (besides the main title for each story, each story has four section titles). See Ding Xigen, p. 219, for a table of contents. 27 Four of his extant plays are based on his own stories, and according to the notes on the table of contents of his Wusheng xi, two more plays on stories in that collection were due to appear (they are not now extant). The stuff-material of both of those stories (nos. 2 and 12 in the collection), however, appear in dramatic treatments by two contemporary playwrights: story 2 is used in Zhu Suchen's (fl. 17th c.) Shiwu guan (Fifteen strings of cash) and story 12 in Chen Erbai's (fl. 1661) Shuangguan gao (Double cap announcement, a.k.a, Shuang guan'gao, Double announcement of official position). Four of Li Yu's plays were, in turn, turned into novels by other writers (see Shen Xinlin, p. 368). 28 See Cui Zi'en, pp. 54-57; and Hanan, Invention, pp. 17-18, 20-21, 86-88, 136, 138-39, and 168. In some instances, such as the prologue to story 2 of Wusheng xi, and in the entire plot of the first story in Liancheng hi, the line between drama and life itself is purposely blurred. 29 Another novel attributed to Li Yu, Hejin huiwen zhuan (The palindrome), is less characterized by these qualities and is particularly lacking in irony and experimentation with the narrator. For an attempt to prove the authenticity of the attribution, see Cui Zi'en, pp. 66-82. The commentator to this novel (known only by the pseudonym Suxuan) was familiar with Li Yu's dramatic theory, his views on the closeness of drama and fiction, and his oath that he

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

61

tial uncertainty about the date of the earliest edition, there was resistance to that attribution for a long time, but it is almost certainly correct. 30 It is also likely that the commentary on the novel (which consists of chapter comments varying in fullness from edition to edition after most of the chapters, along with marginal comments in a manuscript copy held in Japan with a 1657 preface) is by Li Yu or a close associate, so integrated is it with the novel and so similar in concern and vocabulary to Li Yu's work in general (see Chapter 11 below). In Chapter 10 below we will see how editor-critics and writers gave a semblance of unity to novels by including a reference to the beginning of the novel at the end of it. In the case of the Rou putuan, the verbal echo (with a twist) of material in chapter 1 occurs not in the text of the novel but in the chapter comments to the final chapter. Li Yu also has a major reputation as a dramatist and dramatic critic, although his plays have not held up as well as those of some of his predecessors and contemporaries. Some of the factors that Li Yu stressed and that made his plays popular at the time, such as novelty, simplicity of language, and formally satisfying structure, are not sufficient to cover up their lack of content or seriousness. Although Li Yu wrote a commentary for one play, 31 his most influential work on drama occurs in his Xianqing ouji. The first three chapters of this six-chapter work deal with drama; 32 the remainder of the book deals with miscellaneous topics of concern to the cultivated scholar and man of leisure such as interior and exterior decoration, cooking, herbs, taking one's pleasure, and methods of curbing excessive emotion. Li Yu's chapters on drama are designed to serve as a manual for aspiring playwrights and producers of plays. Li Yu had ample experience in these

a

never wrote roman clef plays. Cui Zi'en and others hold that Suxuan is none other than Li Yu. 30 With all due historical caution, Chang and Chang (pp. 234-38) reject the attribution as not based on hard evidence. The most recent comparison of the Rou putuan and Li Yu's other works lists numerous instances of shared language, shared ideas, and shared metaphors (Huang Qiang, "Rou putuan"). 31 Qinlou yue (The moon in the brothel), by Zhu Suchen. According to the commentary, Li Yu authored scenes 21 and 22 (21131a and 22/37a, me). The direct address to the audience in the coda to scene 22 is particularly reminiscent of Li Yu's style. A poem attributed to Li Yu appears on the verso side of an illustration to the play, and the commentator quotes from one of Li Yu's poems (10/47a, me). Some of the comments (e.g., 28/75a-b, me), are very much in line with Li Yu's theoretical comments on drama. This edition of the play also contains a brief concluding comment by Wang Duanshu, who wrote a preface to one of Li Yu's plays. Qinlou yue shares plot elements with another of Li Yu's plays (see Henry, p. 227n10). According to a notice on Zhu Suchen in a Republican era local history of Suzhou, he and Li Yu were friends (see Zhao Jingshen and Zhang Zengyuan, p. 165; and Zhou Miaozhong, p. 53). 32 The sections on drama have been published separately under the title of Li Liweng quhua (Li Yu on drama) since 1925.

62

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

matters, being a prolific playwright who traveled with his own troupe, presenting his and others' plays. His remarks on the importance of innovation, structure, and the predominance of the main theme over subsidiary ones were equally relevant to the writing of fiction, and certain of his favorite terms, such as zhu'nao ("the main brain," the pivotal element or conflict in a play), crossed over into fiction criticism. 33 His remarks on the creation of characters and impersonation are also readily applicable to characterization in fiction, and we can perhaps see some of Li Yu's influence in Zhang Zhupo's approach to these matters. 34 If the commentary on the Sanguo yanyi that appeared under Li Yu's name is indeed by Li Yu, it would have to have been completed during the last months of his life, when he was not in good health. However, the edition contains only marginal comments and would not represent a major undertaking. It includes comments that are reminiscent of Li Yu, such as frequent references to taking the civil service examinations (e.g., SGYYHPB 79.965, 100.1227, me) and the use of terminology favored in the Xianqing ouji. 35 In terms of both depth and importance, however, the commentary is rather slight. Comments and textual revisions were borrowed from the Mao edition, sometimes quite carelessly. For instance, one such comment refers to a textual emendation made in the Mao edition that does not appear in the "Li Yu" edition. 36 Li Yu complained when others reprinted his books without permission, 37 but at least in the case of the famous painting manual published by the Jiezi yu'ln (]iezi yuan huazhuan), for which he wrote the preface, material was borrowed without attribution from an earlier work printed toward the end of the Ming, Shizhu zhai shuhua pu (Collection of calligraphy and painting from Ten Bamboo Studio; Renmin ribao, overseas ed., Oct. 8, 1985, p. 7). 33 On this term, see Plaks, "Terminology," pp. 88, and 88n20. For its possible roots in examination essay criticism, see Huang Qiang, "Bagu wen," p. 107. For a discussion of what Li Yu meant by zhu'nao and how that differs from modern terms such as "theme," see Guo Guangyu, pp. 204-14. For later permutations of the term, see Yang Weihao. 3 ~ Compare Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Yu qiu xiaosi," pp. 85-86, and JPMZLHB 35, df 43 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 224-25). 35 E.g., zhenxian (needle and thread), Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Mi zhenxian" (Make the stitching fine), pp. 26-28; and SGYYHPB 38.479, 480, "Li Yu" me. 36 SGYYHPB 1.2, me, which refers to the white snake killed by Liu Bang, mentioned in the Mao edition but in neither the Li Yu nor the earlier versions. 37 See Hanan, ln'Vention, pp. 12-13, for Li's attempts to suppress pirated editions of his fiction. One of his plays, Yizhong yuan {Ideal love-matches), deals with two women who forge paintings for a living, and a section in his Xianqing ouji is an advertisement for stationery of his own design (available with his other works at his bookstore, to which the reader is directed) and a complaint against unauthorized copying of them and his books, against which he promises a "fight to the death." See Xianqing ouji, "Jianjian" (Stationery), pp. 209-10 (Hanan, ln'Vention, pp. 14-15).

Dealing with fin Shengtan

63

Li Yu mixed high and low culture, and many members of the scholar class looked down upon him as a class traitor. 38 He supported himself by his pen and his flattery of the rich and prominent, and the heavy doses of self-aggrandizement, self-advertisement, and self-commodification in his work are often hard to take. 39 Patrick Hanan has concisely pointed out that Li Yu is unique among writers of vernacular literature because of the quantity of his works extant, his passion for explanation and clarity, and the fact that his writings are "all of a piece" (Invention, p. viii). For our purposes, it is Li's emphasis on commentary (both within and without the margins of his texts) that makes him important. 40

Zhang Zhupo and the fin Ping Mei The earliest edition of the fin Ping Mei, the fin Ping Mei cihua (preface dated 1617-18), contains no commentary, interlineal or otherwise. 41 A recension of the novel appeared not long afterward in several different versions distinguished primarily by the format of the text and type and the amount of commentary. Since the illustrations in one of them contain the names of woodblock print designers active in the Chongzhen reign period (1628-44), all of them are collectively referred to as the "Chongzhen" edition. 42 That designation is not universally accepted; some think one version may predate the cihua edition, and some (such as supporters of the idea that Li Yu

38 Dong Han (fl. 1630-97), for one, said Li Yu should fall directly to the hell where tongues are plucked out (Chang and Chang, pp. 10-11). 39 His reputation as a hired pen is so bad that one scholar has seriously argued that Zhang Jinyan bribed Li Yu to draw a favorable portrait of himself in Wusheng xi and that Li Yu accepted bribes to write the play Tieguan tu (The iron helmet) about the fall of the Ming to clean up the reputation of a Ming general (Liu Zhizhong, pp. 234-35). ~ 0 He solicited comments for his later works (and received them from more than 150 critics and friends). The full title of the Yisheng tang edition of his collected works is Yu'nei zhuming heping Liweng yijia yan quanji (Li Yu's independent words with collected comments from the most famous writers in the world); see Hanan, Invention, pp. 24, 247. The commentaries to his fiction published under Du Jun's name are unusual for the direct way in which they refer to both Li Yu and Du Jun. For the uses of "commentary" in the texts of Li Yu's fiction, see Chapters 11-12 below. ~ 1 Liu Hui ("Cong cihua ben," pp. 7-8) has identified passages he thinks were originally interlineal comments copied into the text by mistake. The quality of the editing is indeed very substandard. The Xinxin Zi preface might be by the author. David Roy (Plum, "Introduction," pp. xxii-xxiii) has argued that similarities between it and the rest of the novel make it likely that Xinxin Zi was either the author or a close intimate. ~ 2 One version lacks commentary. For a bibliographical description of the others, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 439-40. See also Wang Rumei, "Qianyan" (Foreword), XKJPM 2-7. Gu Qing argues that there are four separate versions, three of which date to the Chongzhen period.

64

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

had a hand in the editing and commentary) think none of them predates the fall of the Ming. Although the versions of the Chongzhen edition differ primarily in terms of commentary and illustrations, the text of the novel itself is virtually identical in all of them. The first chapter of the Chongzhen versions (as well as Zhang Zhupo's) diverge almost entirely from that of the ]in Ping Mei cihua. Instead of the complex, layered introduction to the concerns of the novel in the first chapter of the cihua version, with its parallels between Ximen Qing and past emperors and between Pan Jinlian and the tiger killed by Wu Song (see Roy, Plum, pp. 429-36), the first chapter in the Chongzhen versions is much more straightforward. Historical analogies are exchanged for warnings against temptation and Buddhist-flavored poems. The cihua version's intricate call for personal control in the face of external temptation lapses into something closer to plain misogyny. The later editor seems to have taken the Buddhist trappings of the earlier edition seriously. Another change in chapter 1 is that Ximen Qing and the brotherhood of ten as well as other major characters such as Li Ping'r are introduced immediately after the didactic introduction, a feature praised by Zhang Zhupo, who likened it to the standard practice of chuanqi plays. 43 The direct narration in the cihua version of Wu Song's killing of the tiger on Jingyang Ridge borrowed from the Shuihu zhuan is changed to an indirect account by Ying Bojue to Ximen Qing, which is in turn summarized for us by the narrator, probably on the assumptjon that the story was familiar to contemporary readers and only peripherally related to the main narrative. This move also elicited praise from Zhang Zhupo, who compared it favorably to the treatment of the story in the Shuihu zhuan. 44 The novel was substantially reduced in the Chongzhen version, 45 apparently for two related reasons: a desire to lower the total page count by cutting "extraneous" material in order to keep the price per copy low, and a failure to recognize the importance of those supposedly extraneous items. The fin Ping Mei cihua quotes extensively from pre-existing works in both 43 JPMZLHB 37, df 48 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 229). Li Yu believed that all major characters should appear by the fourth or fifth scene of a play (Li Liweng quhua, "Chu jiaose" [Bringing characters onto the stage], p. 101). In the cihua edition, not even Ximen Qing appears in chap. 1. 44 ZZPJPM 1.5, cc 21. He seems unaware of the cihua version. There are similarities between the narrator's abbreviation of Ying Bojue's account of the killing of the tiger with its repetitions of zende (how) and Jin Shengtan's narrator's paraphrasing of Pan Qiaoyun's final confession with its repetition of ruhe Qike what; SHQZ 46.773 n53). Although he did not specifically attribute them to his guben, Jin Shengtan counts each ruhe (SHZHPB 45.858-59, ic); Zhang Zhupo (but not the Chongzhen commentator) counts each zende (ZZPJPM 1.28, ic). 45 There are, however, sections where the Chongzhen text is longer than the cihua one (e.g., the "seduction" of Pan Jinlian by Ximen Qing); see Liu Hui, "Cong cihua ben," pp. 33-34.

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

65

the vernacular (short stories, novels, dramatic arias) and the literary language. Missing the allegorical and symbolic use of this material as well as the irony turned against the quoted works themselves (Carlitz, pp. 114-27), the later editor seems to have viewed this material primarily in terms of quantity rather than quality. For instance, where two songs are quoted in the fin Ping Mei cihua, the Chongzhen version commonly keeps only one. Even when retained, the allegorical dimensions of the quotations are often lost through textual revision. 46 The editorial changes in the Chongzhen version are not, with the exception of two instances, explicitly discussed or justified in the commentary. The commentator points out a difference between his version and what he calls the "original text" (yuanben; XKJPM 4.57-58, me); comparison with the cihua version (JPMCH 4/2b [92]) does reveal a slight change. In the other instance, the commentator refers to his own edition as the original text and claims that in the competition's version, chapter 53 was ruined by a vulgar pen (wei subi gaihuai; XKJPM 30.390, me). Chapters 53-54 in the Chongzhen version do diverge from the corresponding chapters in the cihua version. 47 The Chongzhen Commentary

In terms of commentary, there are three general filiations among the versions of the Chongzhen edition. The earliest type, an exemplar of which is held in the Peking University Library, has both marginal and interlineal comments. A later type, an exemplar of which is held in the Capital Library in Beijing, has interlineal comments only. Finally, one type contains no commentary at all. The contents of the two sets of interlineal comments are largely, but not completely, identical. 48 Other differences include the number and quality of the illustrations and the format of the printed text. Since there is no reason to believe that the marginal and interlineal com-

46 E.g., the revision of "linggui kounei tu qingquan" (coppers spit out of the mouth of the miraculous turtle; used to describe ejaculation; JPMCH 6/7b [p. 136]) and its equation of sex and money so fundamental to the novel as a whole, to the nondescript "zhenzhong tanlang mo beiwang" (Don't forget me, you precious man; XKJPM 6.82). For more on how the Chongzhen version treated quotations from, allusions to, and experiments with oral performing literature in the cihua version, see Rolston, "Oral Performing Literature," esp. pp. 46-52. The excision of "extraneous" material was taken to an extreme in an 1816 edition of the novel, which reduced chapters as long as nine typeset pages to little more than one typeset page (Liu Hui, Chengshu, pp. 103-13). This edition did, however, contain new material in its first four chapters (see Luge and Ma Zheng, "Tan fin Ping Mei," pp. 62-66). 47 An early notice of the novel claimed that chaps. 53-57 were not by the original author. Indeed, they do not fit the rest of the novel well (see Hanan, "Text," pp. 14-33). 48 For differences in the commentary for chap. 7 in three Chongzhen copies, see Huang Lin, "Guanyu]in Ping Mei," p. 62.

66

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

ments are from different hands, I will treat them as the work of a single person. The most interesting facet of the Chongzhen commentator is his willingness to identify with the fictional characters and to let himself be drawn into the action. This is decidedly not a feature of Jin Shengtan's commentarial style; he almost always preserved an aesthetic distance between himself and the fictional world, and he even seemed to expect the reader to experience suspense intellectually rather than viscerally. His attitude also contrasts sharply with that of Zhang Zhupo, who followed Jin Shengtan in this respect. A very important process in the original novel is the seduction of readers into identifying with the characters; they are then awakened by means of sharp rhetorical shifts in the narration that make them realize they are capable of committing the misdeeds perpetrated by the fictional characters in their lack of self-reflection and self-knowledge. The Chongzhen commentator's openness about the attractions of the text for him is rare but very welcome. 49 The Chongzhen commentator saw the story as a cautionary tale told within a Buddhist framework, and in this he is fully in accord with the textual revisions in the Chongzhen version discussed above. 50 This interpretation, including the idea that Ximen Qing is reincarnated as Xiaoge (his son by Wu Yueniang) in order to atone for his sins by becoming a monk, was also advocated by Zhang Zhupo. Zhang Zhupo's Commentary and the Chongzhen Commentary Unlike the major commentators discussed above, Zhang Zhupo made few editorial changes for his edition. 51 He borrowed ideas from the Chongzhen commentary (Plaks, "Chongzhen Commentary," pp. 24-25), but also disa~ 9 He notes Pan Jinlian's sexual prowess (e.g., XKJPM 28.359, 28.363, and 74.1025, me) and other talents with approval (XKJPM 31.403, 43.554, 67.914-15, me). Other related remarks might be ironic, such as the equation of Pang Chunmei's death through sexual excess to entry into the land of the blessed Uile shijie; ibid., 100.1412, ic), or his comment that "she died happy" (side kuaihuo; ibid., me). 50 A comment on the retention of a eulogy in which Ximen Qing is described as a penis (ibid., 80.1162, me) could be taken to imply the commentator was the editor of the Chongzhen version. On the commentator's attitude toward the Buddhist veneer on the text, see Plaks, "Chongzhen Commentary," p. 28. 51 Differences between the texts of the Chongzhen and Zhang Zhupo versions of the novel are very minor. For instance, in the Zhang Zhupo edition the number of items in Cai Jing's memorial in chap. 48 is abbreviated from seven to five, and the text of the items is not given. Unlike Jin Shengtan and the Maos, Zhang Zhupo pointed out contradictions but did not change them. In contrast to the "Ye Zhou" commentaries, he saw contradictions as meaningful clues left by the author to awaken the reader to deeper levels of significance. For instance, he explained contradictions in the chronology of the novel as "deliberately introduced incongruities" (JPMZLHB 34, df37; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 223-24).

Dealing with fin Shengtan

67

greed with some of its conclusions (see Chapter 8 below). He referred to the Chongzhen commentator's comments both as the "original commentary" (yuanping) and as the "vulgar commentary" (supi). 52 Zhang Zhupo's distancing of himself from the earlier commentary at the same time as he borrowed ideas and language from it should be familiar to us from Jin Shengtan's commentary on the Shuihu zhuan. Zhang Zhupo's relationship to Jin Shengtan was close, even though the latter had been dead for some years before the former was born. Zhang Zhupo compared his commentary to that of Jin Shengtan on the Shuihu zhuan, 53 as did his contemporaries, although they were divided as to whether Zhang could stand on equal terms with Jin. 54 Large sections of the fin Ping Mei are borrowed from the Shuihu zhuan, particularly in the first ten chapters. Zhang Zhupo addressed this fact, and the relationship of his comments to those of Jin Shengtan on the corresponding sections in the Shuihu zhuan, in a very open manner: For several chapters after this one [chapter 2], the text of the novel is almost the same as that of the Shuihu zhuan. The reason that the author does not avoid this identity [with the earlier text] is that he wants to show that if you want to portray such a person, you must do it in this way for it to be correct and marvelous; the slightest change will cause it to be wrong. The author's only concern is to relate the entry of [Pan] Jinlian into Ximen Qing's household; what harm is there in describing it in the same way? This also shows that writing is a public affair; it is not the case that because one person brings forth this mixture of emotion and reason [qingli] that others are not permitted to bring forth the same mixture of emotion and reason. Therefore, when I do my commentary, I also focus only on the deep meaning [shenli], segmentation [duanluo], and structuring devices [zhangfa] in the text and follow my own lights in my comments. Even if there are places where my comments are the same as those on the Shuihu zhuan, I do not presume to avoid [bi] [duplicating] them. Since the author has seen fit not to avoid duplication, why should I distort the author's writing just to produce commentary that avoids duplication? Furthermore, even if there is duplication [between our commentaries], he 52 See interlineal comments on ZZPJPM 82.1324 (referring to XKJPM 82.1187, ic) and ZZPJPM 1.19 (referring to XKJPM 1.9, ic). 53 In the biography by his brother, Zhang Zhupo is quoted as saying that with the death of Jin Shengtan nobody knows how well constructed the ]in Ping Mei is and that it is therefore up to him to point this out (Rolston, How to Read, p. 198). 5 ~ For positive and negative verdicts, see Liu Tingji, Zaiyuan zazhi, JPMZLHB 213, and Zhang Chao, letter to an unnamed friend, ibid., p. 196. Zhang Chao lumps Zhang Zhupo's commentary together with Mao Lun's on the Pipa ji, which is interesting in light of the fact that Zhang Zhupo was one of the commentators, along with You Tong and other famous literati, to Zhang Chao's own Youmeng ying (for his comments, see JPMZLHB 197-207) and that Zhang Chao is often thought to be the author of the "Xie Yi" preface to Zhang Zhupo's commentary. On the authorship of this preface, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 440-42, which also contains a bibliographical description of the commentary.

68

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

was commenting on the text of the Shuihu zhuan, I am commenting on the text of the fin Ping Mei. If you say that we are of the same mind, that is fine. If you say that the same text should not be commented on differently, that is also fine. 55

We can, however, interpret his professed fair-mindedness as an attempt to distinguish himself from Jin Shengtan (see also the translation from item 35 of his dufa essay in the previous chapter).

Zhang Zhupo's Interpretation of the "]in Ping Mei" Zhang Zhupo adhered to a basically Buddhist interpretation of the novel. He spoke of Wu Yueniang, Xiaoyu, and Xiaoge becoming enlightened in Yongfu si (Temple of Eternal Felicity; ZZPJPM 88.1395, cc 2). This "enlightenment" is supposedly brought about by the "revelation" in the last chapter of the novel that Xiaoge is Ximen Qing reincarnated. 56 In item 75 of his dufa essay, he stated that the author's learning "is that of a Bodhisattva, not that of a Confucian sage, for his message is that everything is empty [kong]." 57 However, Zhang Zhupo was careful to privilege Confucianism over Buddhism by claiming "I would certainly not presume to use the word 'emptiness' to denigrate the Confucian sages" (JPMZLHB 45, df 102; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 242) and stressing the role of filiality in the book (JPMZLHB 41, df76; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 238). Zhang Zhupo claimed that his commentary would transform the reader's reaction to the book (and perhaps the book as well?): "Ordinary people see the book as lewd, but with..the present addition of my commentary, when they read it again, [they will find] it is nothing but pure moral learning [daoxue]." 58 However, he said that many people cannot maintain the high standards of his choice as moral paragon among the major characters in the novel, Meng Yulou, and this is where Buddhist salvation comes in (ZZPJPM 7.111, cc 11). Other concepts that Zhang Zhupo dealt with are the idea of divine retribution (baoying) 59 and woman as the source of temp-

55 ZZPJPM 2.41, cc 16. Zhang Zhupo did praise parts of this section of the novel that diverge from the Shuihu zhuan (e.g., ZZPJPM 4.79, ic). See Chapter 1 above for Zhang Zhupo's comparison of his commentarial style with that of Jin Shengtan in the fanli to his commentary. 56 For a refutation of this interpretation, see Carlitz, pp. 128-45. Zhang Zhupo also believed that Guan'ge (Li Ping'r's son) was the reincarnation of Hua Zixu, Li Ping'r's first husband (see ZZPJPM 17.263, 59.882, ic, and 59.869-70, cc 2, 4). 57 JPMZLHB 41 (trans. from Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 235). See also item 26, JPMZLHB 31 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 217-18). 58 See ZZPJPM 100.1560, cc 1, and similar claims in "Diyi qishu fei yinshu lun," JPMZLHB 19-20, partially translated below. 59 E.g., ZZPJPM 5.96, ic, andJPMZLHB 27-28, 29-30, 38, and 44, d/18, 23, 51, and 86 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 210, 214-15, 232, 240).

Dealing with fin Shengtan

69

tation and disaster. 60 Some of the larger patterns that he saw in the novel are Ximen Qing's reincarnation as Xiaoge in order to expiate his sins by becoming a monk (JPMZLHB 31, df26; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 217-18), and the substantiation of the saying "If you defile the wife and children of another, your own wife and children will be defiled by others" (yin ren qi· zi, qizi yin ren)Y Like Jin Shengtan before him, Zhang Zhupo carefully constructed an implied author for the reader (and himself) to identify with (see Chapter 4 below). Zhang Zhupo's Motives and Justification for His Commentary

Zhang Zhupo himself put forward several different motives for his commentary on the fin Ping Mei. Sometimes he presented himself as the one person who understood and sympathized with the author: Now, if benighted readers should succeed in convincing the rest of society that this literary masterpiece [the fin Ping Mei] should be regarded as an obscene book and kept out of sight, then the labors of the author who drained himself mentally and physically to create this masterpiece not only for his own benefit but also for that of the gifted writers of all time, would be undone by vulgar men and prove to have been expended in vain.... Although I would not be so presumptuous as to say that I have succeeded in getting to the bottom of the author's mind, I have felt compelled to write this commentary [pi] despite my own inadequacies, by the desire to defend him against all the undeserved calumnies that have been heaped on him. (JPMZLHB 42-43, df82; trans. Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 237-38)

Zhang Zhupo also saw the author as the victim of an unjust world that cared only for money and power and neglected talent. Zhang himself was born into a declining lineage in a prominent clan, and he presented himself in his commentary and other writings as a fellow victim of social injustice. Although his talent was recognized early (in Beijing he was called Zhupo caizi, or Zhupo the Genius), his official career went nowhere, and he died in his twenties. 62 In a prefatory essay to his commentary, he said, More recently, oppressed by poverty and grief, and goaded by "heat and cold," when time weighed heavily on my hands, I came to regret that I had not myself 60 See, e.g., ZZPJPM 1.33, ic, on Zhang Dahu's death. Elsewhere he attributed Pan Jinlian's destructiveness to her environment and upbringing (e.g., JPMZLHB 29-30, df23; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 214), but in general, he was condescending toward women (see JPMZLHB 42, 45, df82, 90; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 236-37, 241). 61 This saying occurs in the Xinxin Zi preface to the cihua version (JPMZLHB 215; Roy, Plum, pp. 4-5), but we do not know if Zhang Zhupo ever saw that preface. He particularly used this idea to explain Sun Xue'e's fall into prostitution (see JPMZLHB 27-28, df 18; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 210). 62 Biographical details, mostly culled from recently discovered materials, can be found in Wu Gan, "Zhang Zhupo nianpu jianbian"; and idem, fin Ping Mei pingdianjia.

70

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

composed a book about the way of the world in order to relieve my depression. Several times I was on the point of setting pen to paper but was deterred by the amount of planning the overall structure required. And so I laid aside my pen and said to myself, "Why don't I carefully work out the means by which this predecessor of mine constructed his book on 'heat and cold'? In the first place this task will relieve my depression; and, in the second place, my elucidation of the work of my predecessor can count as an equivalent for my own planning of a book in the present. Although I may not have created anything of my own, will I not be required to do as much in order to ascertain the means by which this book was created in the past?" Thus I have created a fin Ping Mei for myself. How could I spare the time to write a commentary on the fin Ping Mei for anyone else? ("Zhupo xianhua," JPMZLHB 11; trans. Roy, "Chang Chu-p'o's Commentary," p. 119)

We see in these remarks the insistence, found also in Jin Shengtan and other commentators on fiction and drama, that commentary is not a mere appendage or supplement to the original work but a re-creation, or even an appropriation, of it. Awareness of the boldness of claiming the novel to be a protest against social injustice seems to have prompted Zhang Zhupo to provide disclaimers of any political purpose for the commentary. One approach was to say that he was only in it for the money: I am only 26 years old [Chinese count] and have no ax to grind with anyone. It is definitely not the case that I am engaging in unprincipled behavior in order to relieve my indignation [xiefen], nor is it the case that I have extra money in my purse and am using this printing to get an empry name for myself. It is purely a matter of striving to earn a living. ("Diyi qishu fei yinshu lun," JPMZLHB 20)

In the same essay, Zhang proclaimed a moral purpose for the commentary reminiscent of Jin Shengtan's conceit that his commentary on the Shuihu zhuan would do more to stop unauthorized writing than the book burning of the First Emperor of the Qin dynasty: Moreover, it is not the case that I am using this [the commentary] to earn fame for myself. Because my family owns no land, I just want to earn a small amount of money to live on. It is proclaimed that the fin Ping Mei is under proscription, but I am not merely reprinting the original woodblocks. I emphatically say, "I am creating my own fin Ping Mei." In my fin Ping Mei the lewdness and disorder have been washed clean and only the filiality and brotherly love are preserved. I have changed the running account [zhangbu] 63 into a literary composition, causing the book fin Ping Mei to fall away like the melting of ice or the collapse of a tile roof. If one were

63 This might refer to rumors, also mentioned in the dufa essay (JPMZLHB 34, item 37; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 224), that the novel was a running account of events in the Ximen Qing household written down by a secretary in his employ.

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

71

to credit me with breaking up the original.printing blocks for the ]in Ping Mei, that would not be far from the truth. (JPMZLHB 19)

Zhang Zhupo, as Jin Shengtan had done in his commentaries on the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji, justified his commentary as a pedagogical tool for teaching the reading and composition not only of vernacular literature but of classical literature as well. Expansion of the Model and Influence on Later Commentators Zhang Zhupo's main formal innovation was the welter of prefatory essays and other material he provided for the reader. Jin Shengtan's Shuihu zhuan commentary, with its four prefaces and two prefatory essays, pales before Zhang Zhupo's efforts, which include a preface signed with a made-up name, 64 seven essays (most of them topical), several lists, afanli, and an analytical table of contents, for a total of sixteen items. A subject treated by him but not specifically by earlier writers is the importance of space (especially the spatial grouping of the characters in the Ximen household) in the construction of the novel. 65 Zhang Zhupo popularized the use of several critical terms that influenced later writers and appear in commentaries on later works. His influence in this regard is seen most clearly in the work of two commentators on the Honglou meng: Zhang Xinzhi (fl. 1828-50) 66 and the Mongolian translator of that novel, Qasbuu. 67 The former particularly applied Zhang Zhupo's concept of "frustrated filiality" (see Chapter 4 below) to that novel, but both constantly use dyads that appear in Zhang Zhupo's commentary such as zhenjia (true and false), lengre (heat and cold), and caise (money and sex). The fin Ping Mei as interpreted by Zhang Zhupo, as well as some of his terminology, figure prominently in the earliest commentary on the Honglou meng, the Zhiyan zhai commentary. Zhang Zhupo clearly influenced later fiction composition, particularly sequels and imitations of the ]in Ping Mei. The first two sequels 68 appeared 6 ~ On the pun involved in this name {Xie Yi), see Rolston, How to Read, p. 440. Some think the preface is by Zhang Chao, but I think it as likely that it was written by Zhang Zhupo us· ing a false persona the same way Jin Shengtan did in his "Shi Nai'an" preface (see Wu Gan,]in Ping Mei pingdianjia, pp. 69-70n3). 65 See "Zalu xiaoyin" (A short introduction to the miscellaneous lists), and "Ximen Qing fangwu" (The building and apartments of Ximen Qing's household), JPMZLHB 2, 7-8. 66 E.g., HLMJ 154, item 11 of his dufa essay (Plaks, "How to Read," pp. 327-29). 67 See especially the "general remarks" (zonglun) section of his commentary, HLMZLHB 832-33. 68 They are Yu fiao Li (not now extant) and Ding Yaokang's (1599-1671) Xu fin Ping Mei (Sequel to the fin Ping Mei; ca. 1664). Xu fin Ping Mei was published in revised form under the titles of Gelian huaying (Shadow of flowers behind the curtain; eighteenth c.?) and finwu meng (Dream of the golden chamber; 1911).

72

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

before Zhang Zhupo's commentary, 69 but a third, Sanxu fin Ping Mei (Third sequel to the fin Ping Mei), is more a sequel to Zhang Zhupo's commentary than to the novel itsel£. 70 Although the preface to Lin Lan Xiang (earliest extant edition 1838) says that the novel borrows the best and rejects the worst in the "four great marvelous books," it is really modeled on the ]in Ping Mei, and more precisely, on the Zhang Zhupo commentary to the novel. The opening section of the Lin Lan Xiang imitates the opening item of Zhang Zhupo's dufa essay. Another feature of the Zhang Zhupo commentary implemented in the Lin Lan Xiang is the avoidance of direct description of sexual activity involving positive characters or those whose status is to be raised, and vice versa. 71 Lin Lan Xiang has been put forward as a kind of "missing link" between the fin Ping Mei and the Honglou meng. 72 Among the many ways that Zhang Zhupo's edition of the ]in Ping Mei influenced the Honglou meng/ 3 the idea of restricting direct description of sexual activity to unsavory characters is employed and commented on in the Zhiyan zhai commentary (e.g., ZYZ 21.401, gengchen me). This technique is used in turn in one of the imitations of the Honglou meng, Chen Sen's Pinhua baojian, where it is explicitly discussed by the narrator of that novel (23.329). The general evaluation of Zhang Zhupo has never been too harsh, unlike that of Jin Shengtan and the Maos. For Xie Tao, he was the most honest (laoshi) of the fiction commentators (Xie Tao, "Xiaoshuo hua," Lunzhu xuan, 2: 473). However, in an unpublished manuscript commentary on a Zhang Zhupo edition by Wenlong tfl. 1830-86) only recently discovered (Rolston, How to Read, p. 445), the later man rarely loses the chance to argue with the earlier one and holds up Zhang Zhupo as an example of every69 One edition of Xu fin Ping Mei has Zhang Zhupo's name as commentator on the title page nevertheless. See XSZMTY 337. 70 See, e.g., the way the sequel begins and ends at Yongfu si, which seems to be directly related to item 2 of Zhang Zhupo's dufa essay (JPMZLHB 24; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 202). The sequel also has Ximen Qing renouncing the world (after he comes back from the dead), which seems to fulfill Zhang Zhupo's wish that Ximen Qing eventually become a monk in order to requite his sins (see JPMZLHB 31, df26; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 217). 71 Expressed most succinctly in JPMZLHB 38, d/51 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 230-31). On the influence of Zhang Zhupo on this novel, see Lu Dawei. Treating the sexual behavior of the male and female leads (sheng and dan) allusively and indirectly but that of characters of lower status and morals (the jing and chou roles) more directly and crudely is standard operating procedure in chuanqi drama (Hanan, Invention, p. 156). 72 See Zheng Jijia, pp. 28-33. A serious obstacle is the late date of the earliest extant edition, but evidence has been presented that the novel was written between 1699 and the beginning of the Yongzheng reign period {1723-35), see Qi Yukun, p. 377. 73 The influence of the fin Ping Mei on the Honglou meng is well recognized. For Zhang Zhupo's influence on the Honglou meng in particular, see Wang Rumei, "'Zhang pingben,'" pp. 83-85; and Chapter 14 below.

Dealing with ]in Shengtan

73

thing a fiction commentator should not be. Worse yet, the very idea of Zhang Zhupo's writing a commentary on such a notorious novel alienated members of his family, who suppressed information about the commentary in the clan genealogy and even attributed Zhang Zhupo's early death and lack of descendants to his writing of it (Rolston, How to Read, p. 199). The Xiyou ji and Allegorical Interpretation The Xiyou ji has been variously read as an allegory conveying either a Daoist, Buddhist, Neo-Confucian, or syncretist message. The Chen Yuanzhi preface to the earliest extant dated edition (1592) speaks of the novel in allegorical terms, as did an even earlier preface that it quotes (XYJZLHB 21213). The plot of the novel, which concerns the transmission of the Buddhist canon from India to China, is ostensibly Buddhist, but from the first extended commentary (1663) to the most recent one (1976), most commentators have favored Daoist interpretations. 74 The 1663 commentary claimed the novel was written by a patriarch of the Quanzhen (Complete reality) sect of Daoism, Qiu Changchun (1148-1227), a notion that has retained a certain currency even today. 75 This sect stresses internal or psychological alchemy (neidan) over external or physiological alchemy (waidan), and sees Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism as essentially compatible. Between Chen Yuanzhi's preface and the 1663 commentary, a commentary edition attributed to Li Zhi appeared, probably in the late 1620s, 76 with a preface by Yuan Yuling that stresses the fantastic quality (huan) of the novel. The fanli tells us that the commentary pays particular attention to both self-cultivation and "interesting" (qu) passages, and that the ratio between jesting and serious words is nine to one (Li Zhuowu xiansheng piping Xiyou ji, "Fanli"). The commentary discusses allegorical elements such as the mapping of major characters to the five phases (wuxing), the linkage between individual characters and elements of the self (e.g., Sun Wukong as the "monkey of the mind" [xinyuan]), and phrases such as fangxin Oetting the mind go). The 1663 commentary was published by Wang Xiangxu under the title

74 Modern discussions of allegory and the Xiyou ji include Kao, "Archetypal Approach"; Plaks, "Allegory"; A. Yu, Journey to the West (introduction); Campany, "Cosmogony" and "Demons"; and Bandy. On allegory and sequels to the novel, see Seaman; and X. Liu, "Journey of the Mind"; and idem, Odyssey. 75 See Chen Dunfu. Although Liu Ts'un-yan is skeptical about the authenticity of the Yu Ji {1272-1348) preface in the 1663 edition, he does think that an adherent of the Quanzhen sect might have had some input on the novel (Liu Cunren, "Quanzhen jiao"). 76 For bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 451. On its authenticity, see the appendixes in ibid.; and Plaks, Four Masterworks.

74

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

Xiyou zhengdao shu (The way to enlightenment through the Xiyou ji). 77 Although Wang had published a novel on the Daoist immortal Lii Dongbin the year before, 78 he mostly published works of a more practical nature. 79 The commentary to the Xiyou ji, which consists of pre-chapter and doublecolumn interlineal comments, is officially attributed to Wang Xiangxu under his pen name of Danyi Zi (with the exception of a final comment signed by Huang Zhouxing using the name Huang Taihong). _There is reason to believe, however, that the commentary was at least partially written by Huang Zhouxing. 80 Huang Zhouxing wrote an interesting play entitled Ren Tian le (The joy of man and Heaven) which includes discussion of Li Zhi's and Jin Shengtan's commentaries. In scene 15, the male lead (sheng) complains that Jin Shengtan's theories are not too bad, but the aggravating thing is how he "always took other people's books and changed them about at will, but then said that it [the result] was an 'ancient edition' [guben]." He further claims that for changing one line in the Xixiang ji, Jin Shengtan well deserved execution. 81 Huang Zhouxing was also the author of a playful tale in literary Chinese that, among other things, fabricates a source for its contents.82 Aside from Wang Xiangxu, Huang also knew Dong Yue and his father, Dong Sizhang, the authors of the Xiyou bu. 83 The first of the three collections of letters put together by Huang and Wang includes several letters written between Wang and Li Yu (Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 52n26) and.. one by Jin Shengtan, to which Wang added the following remarks: Shuihu is Shengtan's only extraordinary book. Throughout his mind is clever and his writing elegant. Manipulating his pen as one would [toy with] an ornament, he 77 The fullest form of the title includes the word guben (ancient edition). For bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 452. 78 On this novel, Luzu quanshu (The complete book of Li.i Dongbin), see XSZMTY 350. It is attributed to Li.i Dongbin himself, with Wang Xiangxu claiming only to be its editor. 79 These include a guidebook for merchants and various medical texts. For a list of his publications, see Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 51. 80 The two also collaborated on three collections of letters with commentary with the general title of Chidu xinyu (ibid., p. 39). For evidence that Huang Zhouxing was more involved in the commentary than is commonly thought, see ibid., pp. 40-44. 81 Ren Tian le, shangjuan, 63b-64a. Ellen Widmer introduced this play to me in 1986. The line in the Xixiang ji is one of the best known in Chinese drama. Jin Shengtan changed "How can I withstand her, who turned her autumn ripples [eyes] on me as she left?" (West and Idema, p. 181) to "I, in the face of that turn of her autumn ripple eyes as she was about to depart." For Chinese texts, see Xixiangji zaju, 1/1/38b; and JSTXXJ 1.1.44. 82 See "Bu Zhang Ling Cui Ying hezhuan" (A supplement to the combined biography of Zhang Ling and Cui Ying), pp. 637-47; and Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," pp. 58-59. 83 See ibid., p. 39; and Feng Baoshan, "Dong Yue," pp. 53-54. For the Dongs and their novel, see Chapter 11 below.

Dealing with fin Shengtan

75

really makes one admire him without reserve. Why did he then have to go on and publish a number of books with jejune eight-legged essay type of analysis? A fine letter like this again demonstrates the nimbleness of his writing. (Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 47)

Huang's and Wang's criticism and respect for Jin Shengtan should be kept in mind when we consider their commentary edition of the Xiyou ji. Their edition, like Jin Shengtan's Shuihu zhuan, contains ample prefatory matter, most of which is aimed at giving the reader a picture of the author and his motives for writing the novel. First there is a preface attributed to Yu Ji and dated to 1329 designed to prove that Qiu Changchun was the author of the noveP 4 Huang and Wang did not, in this preface or in the biography of Qiu Changchun they also provided, allow the "author" to speak directly to the reader as Jin Shengtan did in his "Shi Nai'an" preface or even as they themselves had done in other plays and novels. 85 The intent, however, is clearly similar (see also Chapter 4 below). To further buttress the "historicity" of the whole project, Huang and Wang provided a biography of the historical model for the Tang Monk and carefully noted the sources for both biographies. The inclusion of these biographies calls to mind Jin Shengtan's quotation of a historical text on the "real" Song Jiang. At the end of the 1663 commentary is a brief note explaining the "provenance" of Wang's and Huang's guben version of the novel. Its author claims that popular editions (suben) are inferior to their edition because (1) they lack the account of the Tang Monk's childhood in chapter 9, 86 (2) they have added vulgar poetry to pad out the novel, 87 and (3) they contain a lot of Nanjing dialect. The idea that the poetry in the "vulgar editions" needed trimming recalls Jin Shengtan's removal of almost all the incidental poetry quoted by the narrator in the Shuihu zhuan (on the progressive pruning of poetry quoted by the narrator, see Chapter 9 below). In this note and in the chapter-comments to chapter 9 (see Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 48), their guben is identified as coming from the Daliie tang, which was the studio name of a close associate of Wang

84

Modern writers tend to take this preface as a fabrication (e.g., Wu Shengxi, "Xiyou zhengdao shu"; and idem, "Qiu Chuji"). Plaks, Four Masterworks, p. 195, is more inclined to leave the question open. 85 Both Liizu quanshu and Ren Tian le have prefaces or introductory material purporting to be by Lii Dongbin and written in the first person (Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 43). 86 The Huang and Wang version of the Tang Monk's early life is based on pre-existing accounts in popular sources, but their version of chap. 9 seems to be their own. 87 Cf. the translation in Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 48, where she interprets this section as referring to "vulgar expressions" rather than vulgar poetry. Wu Shengxi ("Daliie tang," p. 123) also thinks this item refers to poetry.

76

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

Xiangxu named Zha Wang. 88 Jin Shengtan's "ancient edition" of the Shuihu zhuan was also named after the studio name (Guanhua tang) of a close friend, Han Sichang. And, just as his edition of the Shuihu zhuan swept away all earlier competitors before it, the abridged text of the Xiyou zhengdao shu with its version of chapter 9 became the standard text until modern times. 89 An expanded commentary version of the Xiyou zhengdao shu was brought out by Cai Yuanfang with a preface dated 1750 under the interesting title of Shengtan waishu: Moling Cai Yuanfang zengping Xiyou zhengdao qishu (Jin Shengtan uncollected work: the extraordinary book of the way of enlightenment through the Xiyou ji with additional commentary by Cai Yuanfang of Nanjing). 90 As influential as his edition was, Wang Xiangxu's reputation as a commentator was never high. Although his (and Huang's) interpretation of the novel as an esoteric Daoist text was taken up by Chen Shibin, Liu Yiming, Zhang Hanzhang (fl. 1839), and most recently (1976) Chen Dunfu, 91 he was criticized for "guessing off the top of his head" and flippancy by Liu Yiming92 and for "groping about on the surface" by Liu Tingji (Zaiyuan zazhi, Lunzhu xuan, 1: 383). Other Allegorical Approaches to the "Xiyou ji" and Their Influence

A new turn in commentaries on the Xiyou ji was initiated by Zhang Shushen (fl. 1749) and his Neo-Confucian interpretation of the novel, which argued that it conveys the e;sential meaning of the Daxue (Great learning) in an attractive form (for bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 454). His example seems to have inspired Zhang Xinzhi to write a commentary on the Honglou meng that makes a similar argument. 93 Zhang Xinzhi was also fond of mapping characters in the novel to different

88 Widmer, "Hsi-yu cheng-tao shu," p. 48. She is uncertain about the existence of the Daliie tang edition (see pp. 50, 56, 61). 89 Exceptions are the Zhang Shushen edition, which is fuller, and the Chen Shibin edition, which is even more abbreviated; see Wu Shengxi, "Daliie tang," pp. 103, 113. 9 For bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 453. For more on Cai Yuanfang, see Chapter 3 below. 91 For descriptions of these commentaries, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 453-55. For a translation of Liu Yiming's dufa essay for the novel, see A. Yu, "How to Read." Excerpts from it have also been translated by Thomas Cleary, Vitality, Energy, Spirit: A Taoist Sourcebook (Boston: Shambhala, 1991), pp. 253-55. 92 See his first preface to his commentary, XYJZLHB 245, where he also holds Wang responsible for all the later "bad" interpretations of the novel. 93 For bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 475-79. For an introduction to and translation of his dufa essay for the Honglou meng, see ibid., pp. 323-40.

°

Dealing with fin Shengtan

77

hexagrams in the Yijing, 94 an approach also used on the Xiyou ji. 95 Yijing numerology also plays a role, albeit small, in Jin Shengtan's commentary on the Shuihu zhuan. 96 Two other systems of correspondences used by novelists to order interrelationships among characters and by commentators to reveal patterns of meaning have been dubbed by Andrew H. Plaks "bipolar complementarity" (yin and yang) and "multiperiodicity" (the five phases). 97 Because of the Yijing and "categorical resonance" (leiying), allegorical thinking in China in general took a slightly different form than in the West, where it mainly concerned the relationship between a fictive mimetic level found on the surface of the text and a higher world indicated metaphorically. The hidden meaning (the tenor of the metaphor) is given priority over the surface description. Although this may sound like Zhuang Zi's saying that words are like a fish trap to be forgotten once the meaning (the fish) is caught, in most "allegorical" writing in China, from the "Lisao" on, the reader does not generally seize the hidden level and erase the mimetic one, but accepts their co-existence. 98 For instance, allegorical dimensions of Ximen Qing in the fin Ping Mei suggest that he is a figure for the emperor, but he is not a roman clef portrait of any one emperor, nor is he to be seen primarily as emperor. His position as head of his household is analogous to that of the emperor's role in the empire (Roy, Plum, pp. 432-33). Levels of meaning are added without subverting the mimetic surface. Allegorical markers were thus not necessarily taken as "unrealistic" by traditional readers. 99 Also, since it is not a matter of linking two separate and

a

94

See, e.g., items 26 and 27 of the manuscript version of his dufa essay, HLMJ 157-59 {trans. Plaks, "How to Read," pp. 335-39). That such ideas did not always find favor can be seen in the deletion of those two items in reprints of the novel under the title of Zengping butu Shitou ji {The story of the stone with added commentary and illustrations). For other examples of the use of Yijing hexagrams to interpret the Honglou meng, see Guo Yushi, p. 50, on Zhou Chun {1729-1815) and HLMSL 183-84 on how the interpretation of the characters in the Shuihu zhuan according to Yijing hexagrams by a Manchu named Wentong influenced a similar use of them to interpret the Honglou meng by someone known as Jie'an. 95 See, e.g., item 24 of Liu Yiming's dufa essay for the Xiyou ji, XYJZLHB 250 {A. Yu, "How to Read," pp. 308-9); and the preface for the reprinting of the commentary in 1820, XYJZLHB 257. 96 See SHZHPB P.39-41, ic; and Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 589-90. 97 See Plaks, Archetype and Allegory; and idem, "Allegory." For an example of the five phases as an interpretive tool in the Xiyou zhengdao shu and the claim that previous commentators {referred to as "Li Zhi, Y e Zhou, and their ilk") had missed this, see Xiyou zhengdao shu, 22/1b, cc. 98 Concerning the Japanese use of parables in the Lotus Sutra, Robert R. LaFleur holds that they are simultaneously vehicle and tenor and affirm concrete reality at the same time as they declare that reality impermanent. See his The Karma of Words: Buddhism and the Literary Arts in Medieval japan {Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), p. 87. 99 "The allegory [the vehicle of the metaphor or allegory] is real and that which is allegorized [the tenor] is also real" (Qian Zhongshu, Tanyi lu, supplement to section 69, p. 231).

78

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

complete worlds, there is even less reason in Chinese allegories for the metaphorical relationship or one-to-one correspondences to be sustained throughout a work (see P. Yu). Roman aClef Interpretations A different kind of "allegorical" relationship between the text and another plane of reality is posited in roman clef interpretations. Fictional worlds are always related to the external world in some way, but Chinese roman clef interpretations of fiction (or drama) hold that they are written to praise or blame real historical figures, and interpretation necessitates the identification of these one-to-one correspondences. As can be expected, such a conception tends to produce reductionist readings. The use of fiction (and drama) as a political tool to attack one's enemies seems as old in China as the conscious writing of fiction itself. An early example is the "Baiyuan zhuan" (Tale of the white ape), allegedly written for the purpose of slandering the parentage of Ouyang Xun (557-641). 100 Suspicion of authors' motives remains strong in contemporary China, as in the condemnation during the Cultural Revolution of plays about Hai Rui (1514-87) by WuHan and others for their alleged attacks on Mao Zedong through the figure of the Jiajing emperor. In any case, suoyin (searching for what is hidden) interpretations are an example of the overdoing of the traditional insistence on guessing the historical contexts of literary works as part of the process of their interpretation (see Owen). Although Zhang Zhupo rejected •the common roman clef interpretations of the fin Ping Mei, he still upheld the idea that fiction is written because the author has an ax to grind or an enemy to attack (see Chapter 4 below). This way of looking at fiction (and drama) was very attractive in the Ming and Qing and was perhaps connected to a simultaneous interest in topical fiction and drama. Examples are Taowu xianping (Idle comments on the history of awful events), a novel focused on the notorious eunuch Wei Zhongxian (1568-1627) that appeared immediately after his downfall from power, or Li Yu's (1591?-1671?) Qingzhong pu (Roster of the pure and loyal), a play on the protest over the arrest in Suzhou of Zhou Shunchang (1584-1626) by the eunuch faction. 101 At the same time, works set in the past, such as the ]in Ping Mei or the Rulin waishi, were also recognized as criticizing the affairs of their own day. 102 Perhaps because he was so visible, the author who seems to have felt

a

a

a

100

For discussion of this and other examples from literary tales, see Hightower, "Yuan Chen," p. 120; and Dudbridge, pp. 187-90. 101 See Chen Dakang, pp. 304-5, for the titles of fourteen topical novels from the MingQing transition period. 102 On topical and historical references in the Rulin waishi, see Roddy, chap. 2.

Dealing with fin Shengtan

79

most threatened by audience expectations of authorial ax grinding was Li Yu. A separate section of his Xianqing ouji cautions critics against roman clef interpretations 103 and warns writers that murdering others by the pen (or brush) is a hundred times worse than doing it by the sword (Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Jie fengci," p. 13). He vociferously protested his innocence,104 going so far as to swear an oath with muteness for his descendants for three generations as penalty if he breaks it. 105 However, viewers of his plays persisted in asking him who he had in mind by the portrayal of suchand-such a character in such-and-such a way (Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Jie fengci," p. 18). Disclaimers appeared in editions of fiction, some of which recall the legal notices included in modern novels and films to avoid libel suits:

a

This book is totally made up and is not based [on actual events or people]. As for the names [of the characters] it is possible that some may accidentally be the same as those of worthy persons in the land, but there are absolutely no secret references to anyone involved here. If anyone claims that I am secretly attacking anyone, may I fall into the circle of hell where tongues are torn out [if it is true]. (Li Liiyuan's preface to his Qilu deng, 1777, JPMZLHB 465)

a

Practitioners of roman clef interpretations were supposedly searching for hidden meanings (suoyin) and are referred to as belonging to a "school" of this type of interpretation (suoyin pai). Suoyin pai interpretations of two novels, the Honglou meng and the Rulin waishi, were particularly popular. Both have heavy and verifiable autobiographical input/ 06 but only in the case of the latter did suoyin interpretations deal with real facts about the author (Roddy, chap. 2). This is partially explained by the lateness of the identification of Cao Xueqin as the author and the dearth of available knowledge about him. Suoyin pai interpretations of the Rulin waishi begin with the publication of a postface in 1869 by Jin He (1818-85), a distant relative of Wu Jingzi, that identified models for many of the characters in the novel. His percent103 One of the examples he gives is the interpretation of the Pipa ji as a satire on Wang the Fourth (Wang Si) advocated by the Maos (discussed above); see Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Jie fengci" (Avoid personal satire), pp. 14-15. 10 ~ Patrick Hanan believes Li Yu had to leave Jinhua because people thought his play about a lesbian couple, Lian xiangban (Women in love), was a disguised reference to a local family (Invention, p. 15). This idea is disputed in Chang and Chang, p. 108n43. Yuan Yuling was supposedly sued for libel for one of his plays (Hegel, Novel, pp. 121-22). 105 Probably an allusion to stories that Luo Guanzhong's descendants for three generations were struck mute because of his authorship of the Shuihu zhuan (see Kong Lingjing, p. 16). Li Yu quotes part of his oath in Li Liweng quhua, "Jie fengci," pp. 17-18, and a fuller version appears in Xu Ke's Qubai (Anecdotes about drama), in Guo Shaoyu, 3: 290. 106 See M. Huang, Literati, on the autobiographical aspects of these two novels. See also Chapter 4 below.

80

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

age of errors turns out to have been rather high (several are pointed out in Zhang Peiheng, "Rulin waishi yuanshu," p. 57), considering his claim to inside information. Identification of models for characters, as well as literary sources, has remained a preoccupation in both later commentaries and modern research on this novel, but this kind of information does not tend to be presented as the key to the interpretation of it. The situation was very different with the Honglou meng. Perhaps because so little was known about the author (even though his name appears in the text, even if only as editor; see Chapters 4 and 14 below), readers showed considerable "creativity" in their construction of implied authors (see Chapter 4 below). Since the novel portrays the very highest levels of Chinese society, suoyin pai commentators are almost unanimous in claiming that the models for characters in the novel also traveled in the highest circles of imperial power. In Hu Shi's analysis of suoyin pai interpretations of the novel, he identified three main theories about the identity of the protagonist, Jia Baoyu (Hu Shi, "Honglou meng kaozheng," pp. 175-89). One is that Jia Baoyu is the Shunzhi emperor (r. 1644-61), and Lin Daiyu is the imperial consort Dong E. 107 A second group held that he was modeled after Nalan Xingde (1654-85), a Manchu bannerman famous for his ci poetry and the son of a prime minister, Mingzhu (1635-1708; see Hu Shi, "Honglou meng kaozheng," pp. 185-89, for examples). A third faction held that the novel is an anti-Manchu tract in which the twelve beauties (shi'er jinchai) refer to Han Chinese offici~ls who surrendered to the Qing. 108 New suoyin pai interpretations of the Honglou meng still appear year after year (see Fang Mao; and Liu Mengxi, Hongxue, pp. 107-77). What is striking about many of them is the almost religious conviction with which they are presented. The Honglou meng no doubt attracts so many interpretations of this type because of its multilayered and polyvalent nature and because it treats the very highest reaches of society, but perhaps most important, because it is a novel that excites people and is at the center of a whole industry of publishing and other activities. The rise of suoyin pai interpretations of fiction can also be seen as an indication of the rise in status of fiction in Chinese society, because it represents, in some respects, an application of traditional critical scholarship (kaoju) to fiction. 109 Suoyin commentators rely mainly on linguistic clues in the text to support their arguments. Puzzling out esoteric meanings by breaking down 107 The most developed example is Wang Mengruan and Shen Ping'an, Honglou meng suoyin (1916). For bibliographic description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 480. 108 The most famous example is Cai Yuanpei, Shitou ji suoyin (1916). For bibliographic description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 482-83. 109 So argued Wang Guowei in his "Honglou meng pinglun" (Guo Yushi, p. 117). See also Chapters 3-4 below.

Dealing with fin Shengtan

81

Chinese characters into their component parts and interpreting the result (chaizi) has a long tradition in China. 110 This habit, plus the abundance of homophones in the language and the consequent possibilities for puns and hidden messages, provides inexhaustible raw material for building all manner of interpretive theories. It is clear that even the earliest authors of fiction embedded a variety of puns into the names of their characters (e.g., the name of the character Wu Y ong in the Shuihu zhuan is homophonous with wuyong or "useless"; see Plaks, "Shui-hu chuan," p. 29), producing effects, at their crudest, equivalent to Henry Fielding's naming the tutor in Tom jones Thwackum. 111 In China this practice was referred to by critics as mingming Oiterally, "setting the name") and ming quan zixing (self-revealing names), and it is a prominent feature of the fiction commentary tradition from its very beginnings. 112 It reaches its most developed form in Zhang Zhupo's '']in Ping Mei yuyi shuo" (Allegorical meaning in the ]in Ping Mei). In that essay he searched for meanings in the characters' names, concentrating on their internal relationships and how they fit into the overall meaning of the novel. 113 He favors biological and horticultural analogies between characters and the world of nature, a tendency also picked up and developed in works influenced by himY 4 Suoyin pai interpreters use the same approach to tie fictional characters to historical figures. Our intrinsic lack of interest in suoyin pai interpretations of the Honglou meng does not, however, negate the idea that some authors did use acquaintances and contemporaries as models for fictional characters. Moreover, some of those authors did leave clues to the identity of the original models 110

Numerous examples are given in Friedrich Alexander Bischoff, Interpreting the Fu: A Study in Chinese Literary Rhetoric (Weisbaden: Steiner Verlag, 1976). Chaizi appears as a divination technique in novels (e.g., Kuang Chaoren in the Rutin waisht) and drama (e.g., Kuang Zhong in Shiwu guan). Some novels were supposedly written so that an encoded message could be obtained by skipping every other character or by reading the pages horizontally rather than vertically, but no examples seem to exist. See Sun Yuming, pp. 312-13, on rumors of a "horizontal" message embedded in the Xu fin Ping Mei, and XSZMTY 134-35 for an account of an "every-other-character" message in the Gelian huaying recorded by Ping Buqing (1832-96). 111 Characters with names of this sort are restricted largely to secondary characters in the West (Uspensky, pp. 161-62). 112 E.g., Jin Shengtan on Chao Gai's name, SHZHPB 16, df11 (John Wang, "How to Read," p. 134). See also the separate section on mingming in ZLHC 124-28. 113 Elsewhere in his commentary on the novel he claimed, "In this book there is not a single name that does not have a deep meaning" (ZZPJPM 80.1296, cc 2). 1 H E.g., the opening section and commentary of the Lin Lan Xiang and Hong Qiufan's (fl. 1885) Du Honglou meng suibi (Random notes on reading the Honglou meng), particularly items 6-14 of the "Zonglun" (General remarks). For bibliographic description of Du Honglou meng suibi, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 479-80. On the finding of a second and attributed copy of the manuscript of this commentary, see Chen Qixin. On the influence of this prefatory piece by Zhang Zhupo, see Chen Hong, Lilun shi, pp. 237-39.

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

82

through the choice of the characters' names. The clearest example is the Rulin waishi, where, for instance, Ma Chunshang is referred to in the novel as Mr. Mathe Second (Ma Er xiansheng). The surname of the main model for this character, Feng Cuizhong (a friend of the author's), is composed of the character "Ma" with two (er) strokes to the left of it. 115 The existence of such clues indicates that the relationship between models and characters must have been meaningful to the author on some level. A different question is whether it should be meaningful for us. Lu Xun thought not: However, if a piece of fiction can cause any reader to completely enter into it, if the author's technique is skilled enough and the work is passed on for enough time, then what the reader sees is nothing but the characters in the novel, and they have no connection to the person who once actually existed [and served as the model]. For example, as for the fact that the model for Jia Baoyu in the Honglou meng is Cao Xueqin himself and the model for Mr. Ma the Second in the Rulin waishi is Feng Zhi[sic]-zhong, today we only feel that they are none other than Jia Baoyu and Mr. Mathe Second. It is only a certain type of scholar such as Hu Shi and his ilk who have Cao Xueqin and Feng Zhizhong stuck in their minds so fast that they can't forget them. This must be a case of what they mean when they say that a man's life is finite, but art is immortal. 116

This is an overstatement; indeed, elsewhere Lu Xun was critical of Chinese readers for entering too deeply into fictional worlds and failing to maintain a critical distance. Lu Xun was also rather testy when asked about the models for characters in his own fiction. •Although investigation into models for the characters in the Rulin waishi, for instance, can answer some questions, in no case do we find a complete one-to-one correspondence between the models and the characters, nor do the individual characteristics of the models seem to be privileged over the demands of the overall purposes of the novel. Traditional Chinese fiction commentators were convinced (or at least wanted their readers to be so convinced) that works of fiction contained

115

For examples of how the names and native places of some of the characters in the novel are related to those of their models, see the chart in He Zehan, pp. 110-13. For further discussion of models for fictional characters, see Chapter 6 below. A later example, most certainly influenced by the Rulin waishi, is Zeng Pu's (1872-1935) Niehai hua (Flowers on a sea of sin), often published with a chart identifying the historical models for the characters. For an example of such a chart, see Zeng Pu, "Appendix 2," pp. 356-68. A list in Zeng's own hand of the historical figures that he wanted to write about in his novel (the original design was never completed) has been preserved. See Shi Meng, pp. 135-37. For Western examples, see Davis, p. 114. 116 "Chuguan de 'guan'" (The "pass" in Going out Through the Pass), in his Qiejie ting zawen mobian (Last collection of miscellaneous essays from Qiejie Pavilion), RL WSYJZL 290.

Dealing with fin Shengtan

83

allegorical messages. Explanations for this seem to fall into two general categories. The first category involves a notion that the "real" story hidden behind the surface of the text touches on sensitive matters that the author could not mention openly for a variety of reasons. These include (1) politics and personal safety 117 (most of the roman clef interpretations seem to be premised on this idea), (2) the content and possible embarrassment to the author (in certain circles for it to be known that you wrote regular fiction, much less erotic fiction, would be an embarrassment), (3) a perceived need to keep esoteric knowledge secret (some Xiyou ji commentaries affirm this idea at the same time that they explain this esoteric knowledge to a wider audience), (4) certain abstract ideas or patterns (li) are not accessible to direct apprehension but must be spoken of through concrete examples (shi; see the quotation from Cai Yuanfang's preface to his commentary edition of the Lieguo zhi in Chapter 4 below) or, less philosophically, deep ideas are best understood by means of parables (e.g., Zhang Hanzhang's preface to his commentary on the Xiyou ji, XYJZLHB 239), and (5) authors have to sugarcoat their messages so that readers will swallow them against their will. 118 This last was the basic strategy of the "jesters" (guji) first described at length in chapter 126 of his Shiji by Sima Qian and so influential in the later development of both drama and fiction. All of this lies behind sayings such as "fiction is allegory" (xiaoshuo yuyan ye; e.g., Sixin, p. 580, cc, chap. 8 of the Rou putuan). The second category treats the writing and understanding of fiction as a kind of literary game in which it would be unsporting for the author to show his hand too openly. This "game" requires the reader to actively speculate about the author's intention and motives. The writing and reading of fiction commentaries raised the stakes in this literary game, as both authors and readers became more sophisticated and the "rules" became more elaborate. Another reason for the tendency to allegorize fiction is also related to the rise of fiction commentary itself. Once Jin Shengtan accepted responsibility for the complete text of the fiction he published with commentary, later commentators not as willing as he to change their texts to suit their own purposes were driven to provide explanations for all manner of flaws that, on the surface, seem no more than mistakes. The most common ex-

a

117

An example of how high the stakes were is Su Shi's (1037-1101) indictment for lese· majeste and other crimes for some poems he wrote. For the interpretations the authorities forced him to make of some of his poems, see Charles Hartman, "Poetry and Politics in 1079: The Crow Terrace Poetry Case of Su Shih," CLEAR 12 (1990): 15-44, pp. 22-35. 118 Commentators refer to this as meici (flattery laced with remonstration) or shun qi hao er gong qi bi (go along with his likes in order to attack his faults).

84

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

planation for these "errors" is that they were purposefully planted to catch the attention of the careful reader so as to alert him to the presence of an hidden allegorical level in the novel. 119 119 For examples from other commentarial traditions, see Henderson, pp. 168-69. For examples from Chinese fiction criticism, see Chapter 6 below.

3

Decline and Revival

The golden age of traditional Chinese fiction criticism was the seventeenth century, when Jin Shengtan, the Maos, Zhang Zhupo, Wang Xiangxu, and Huang Zhouxing were active. 1 In the previous chapter we examined some of the trends that eventually brought fiction commentary into disrepute: forced allegorical and suoyin interpretations. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the production and reading of commentaries on fiction increased, but the quality did not. In this chapter we will look at trends and examples from these two centuries and the fate of the enterprise in the twentieth century.

Sequels and Imitations and Fiction as Commentary Along with the decline in the quality of fiction commentary, the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries also saw a decline in the quality of the fiction being written. With the exception of perhaps two masterpieces (the Honglou meng and the Rulin waishi) and a number of flawed but interesting works, the bulk of the novels and short-story collections from this period are rather undistinguished. One probable reason is the popularity of writing sequels and imitations of classic novels. Some of this energy had previously been invested in rewriting and editing those same classics, but with the acceptance of the seventeenth-century commentary editions as standard texts, this was no longer an option. Traditional Chinese drama and fiction had always had a tendency toreturn again and again to the same stories (Liu Hui, "Ticai neirong"). Perhaps this is related to Confucius' self-characterization of his activities as "trans-

1

See, e.g., Dolezelova-Velingerova; and Xu Shuofang, p. 224.

86

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

mission" (shu) rather than "creation" (zuo). 2 Particularly in the case of the more public and exposed genre of drama, 3 this conservatism becomes quite pronounced in the middle and late Qing (Naquin and Rawski, p. 62). Li Yu perhaps had the most to say about innovation and novelty, but in the two places where he was most explicit, "Tuo kejiu" (Get out of old ruts) and "Bian jiu cheng xin" (Transform the old into the new), most of his concrete proposals for innovation concern revision of older works, as is also the case in the following: Even in the case of plot material already used by others, there are emotions not completely exhausted by the representation of them, and there are situations not completely portrayed. If you can put yourself in their [the authors'] shoes [sheshen chudi], bring out what is hidden and expound the subtle, then the dead (authors] will lend you their souls, their flower-producing brushes, and their deep and refined hearts. If you write a play [in this way], people will only appreciate how very new and very luscious the words of the text are and completely forget the fact that the plot material is extremely old and decrepit. This is the highest level [of composition], and I have the ambition of accomplishing this, but have not yet been successful. (Li Liweng quhua, "Jie huangtang," p. 33)

He advocated renewing old plays by changing the dialogue and the skits while retaining the arias and main events (Li Liweng quhua, "Bian jiu cheng xin," p. 116) and offered his revision of a scene from Mingzhu ji (The tale of the bright pearl), by Lu Cai (1497-1537), as an example (Li Liweng quhua, pp. 121-36). According to him, n~t only does the work of other, earlier writers go stale, but the same happens to one's own plays (Li Liweng quhua, "Tuo kejiu," p. 23). We find the same fondness for the reworking of old material in Chinese fiction. This is most true, of course, in the genre of historical fiction, since individual works were often justified as popularizations of standard historical works. It is also quite true of the short story before the last years of the Ming dynasty. A fair proportion of the 120 stories in Feng Menglong's three collections (the so-called Sanyan) are reworkings of literary-language

2 Lunyu VII.l (Waley, Analects, p. 123). KarlS. Y. Kao ("Aspects," pp. 1-2) sees this phenomenon in Chinese narrative, which he terms "derivational creativity," as "an identification with the model or canon, along with variation or innovation away from the model." 3 The writing and performance of drama were more generally public acts than the writing and reading of fiction. The identity of the author was more likely to be known because of the practice of openly claiming authorship in the prefaces or prologues to plays, as in the Mudan ting (The peony pavilion) and the Taohua shan (Peach blossom fan). The false but popular belief that Kong Shangren's (1648-1718) resignation from office was connected to the performance of his Taohua shan is an example of how vulnerable the playwright was thought to be.

Decline and Revival

87

tales or earlier vernacular versions. 4 Feng Menglong stresses the antiquity of his stories and covers up his own contributions and innovations/ which include recasting stories according to his notion of how storytellers originally told them. Ling Mengchu's (1580-1644) stories, by contrast, often mention their sources, and Li Yu either cites mythical sources, claims he has none, or treats his own material in both fictional and dramatic form (see Chapters 11-12 below). Whereas the earliest novels borrowed from each other without attribution,6later fiction explicitly referred to other fictional texts and worked the titles of other texts into their own. 7 Perhaps the authors of earlier texts thought that reference to other works of fiction would damage their claims to be writing something more important than mere fiction. Later fiction, on the other hand, often indulged in parodies of earlier works. 8 The writing of sequels to famous novels in traditional China is an important phenomenon little studied to date9 and clearly related to this dialectic of continuity and innovation. Sequels such as the Shuihu houzhuan both corrected perceived flaws in the original and allowed the author to express his own feelings on current affairs. The text and commentary in the Shuihu houzhuan explicitly ask the reader to compare this sequel and the Shuihu zhuan. Indeed, the very writing of a sequel implies such a comparison. ~ On prior treatments of the stuff-material for Feng Menglong's Sanyan stories and Ling Mengchu's (1580~1644) two collections (the so-called Liangpai), see Hanan, Chinese Short Story; Tan Zhengbi, Sanyan Liangpai ziliao; and A. Uvy, Inventaire. 5 For more on these innovations, see Hanan, Chinese Short Story, pp. 76-92; idem, Chinese Vernacular Story, pp. 98-119; and Sato Teruhiko. 6 E.g., the burning of Cao Cao's boats at the Red Cliffs in the Sanguo yanyi (chaps. 49-50) is rehearsed on a lesser scale in chap. 79 of the Shuihu zhuan (SHQZ 79.1308-9). Commentators generally delight in pointing out these "borrowings," although they tend to claim their novel as the original and other novels as the borrowers. 7 Li Yu, in story 13 of his Wusheng xi, mentions the earlier short-story collection by Feng Menglong, ]ingshi tongyan (Wusheng xi, p. 189). See also Hanan, Invention, p. 123, on implied criticism of earlier erotic novels mentioned in two places (chaps. 4 and 14) by title in the Roupu tuan. Li Ruzhen (ca . 1763-ca. 1830), in his ]inghua yuan (The fate of the flowers in the mirror), mentions the Xiyou ji three times (in chaps. 27, 32, and 71). This process begins rather earlier in drama, where prologues and epilogues were particularly used for references of this sort and fictional characters could make an appearance on stage, as in Li Kaixian's farce, Yuanlin wumeng (Noon dream in the garden; trans. in West and Idema, pp. 429-36). 8 On how two of Li Yu's Wusheng xi stories are parodies of Feng Menglong's stories, see Hanan, Invention, p. 172. 9 To date, only three of these sequels, Dong Yue's Xiyou bu, Chen Chen's Shuihu houzhuan, and the anonymous Hou Xiyou ji (The later journey to the west) have received monographlength treatment in English. They and their authors are the subjects of books by Frederick Brandauer, Ellen Widmer, and X. Liu, respectively. On sequels and imitations in Chinese fiction, see Li Shiren; Lin Chen, pp. 116-21; Wang Ruo; and Zhong Chang. Ye Jiuru (p. 65) claims that Chinese sequels are unequaled in number in the world.

88

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

Comparison, unfortunately, tends not to redound to the credit of the sequel. to The difficulty of surpassing a canonical work (presumably the motive for writing a sequel or an imitation) 11 is simultaneously an attraction and a cause for caution. Li Yu seems to have had the latter in mind when he warned two persons against writing a sequel to the Shuihu zhuan and revising the Xixiang ji: If you want to chase them [the Xixiangji and the Shuihu zhuan] off and force them to yield their places of honor to you, this is extremely improbable. Putting aside the question of whether a revised Xixiang ji or a sequel to the Shuihu zhuan could be possible, even if such works surpassed their predecessors several times over, I know that everyone would independently give pat evaluations of the new works as "patching a sable coat with dog's fur" or "as unnecessary as legs on a snake." (Li Yu, Li Liweng quhua, "Yinlii," p. 58)

According to Li Yu, he succeeded in dissuading the two men. Certain commentators, however, likened the relationship between the work they were commenting on and previous texts to that between sequel and original in order to raise the reader's estimation of their work, as Zhang Zhupo did in contending that the fin Ping Mei is a continuation of Shagou ji (Tale of the slaying of a dog), a play with a clear moral message. 12 As admirable as it might be to try to surpass previous works of fiction, most of the sequels fell short of the originals. One reason is that many of the sequels are positioned as "corr~ctives." 13 This produces two problems: sequels of this kind are more "reactive" than creative, and they often perversely set out to redo or eliminate precisely what is unique or of most value in the original. 14 Not only did critics generally look unfavorably on

10 E.g., the killing of the tiger by Yang Y ao in another sequel to the Shuihu zhuan is silly enough when taken by itself (Hou Shuihu zhuan, 3.24-27, where he rides the tiger to death and then falls asleep) but suffers even more when compared to its model, Wu Song's killing of a tiger in chap. 23 of the older versions of the Shuihu zhuan. 11 It became increasingly common for prefaces (and even prologues or first chapters) to claim their novels worthy of a place in the canon because they surpassed canonical works in specific ways. The Xianzhai laoren preface to the Rulin waishi is an example (RL WSHPB 76364; Rolston, How to Read, pp. 248-51). On prologues substituting for prefaces of this kind, see Chapters 9 and 10 below. 12 See item 107 of his dufa essay (JPMZLHB 46; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," p. 243); ZZPJPM 80.1297, cc 7; and an interlineal comment when the play is performed by puppets in the text (ibid., 80.1301). Both the play and the novel, according to him, are concerned primarily with the promotion of filiality. 13 On sequels to the Honglou meng from this perspective, see Miller, p. 202; and Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 810-11. H Witness, e.g., the countless sequels to the Honglou meng that insist on turning this essentially tragic story into a comedy.

Decline and Revival

89

sequels, narrators and characters in novels do so also. Ironically, many of these discussions take place in sequels, although the sequels in which they appear are put forward, implicitly or explicitly, as exceptions to the rule. 15 As with parodies, in sequels and imitations it is no longer possible to deny the fabricated nature of the fiction or claim that one is telling a "true story." 16 It is immediately clear that the referent is now previous literature rather than the "world. " 17 This abandonment of the pretense of not writing "fiction" allows both author and commentator to take the fabricated nature of the text more seriously and to engage in a variety of formal experimentation. Thus it becomes possible in one of the sequels to the Honglou meng for Cao Xueqin himself to appear in the sequel and for him to engage in discussions with characters from the original novel about the writing of the original, even as we see him writing the sequel itsel£. 18 Some later novels end with an invitation to the curious or unsated reader to turn to a named sequel written by the author himself. 19 Other novels, such as the jinghua yuan, end with the never fulfilled and perhaps tonguein-cheek promise of a forthcoming sequeJ.2° Sequels and imitations, and discussions of other novels and sequels by narrators or fictional characters, all constitute a form of fiction commentary.21 One author, Ding Yaokang (1599-1671), went further and presented his novel, the Xu ]in Ping Mei, not so much as a sequel to the original fin 15

For instance, Langxuan shanqiao's (pseud.) Bu Honglou meng (Supplement to the Honglou meng; 1820) discusses sequels in three places. In chap. 1, the narrator discusses other sequels to the Honglou meng, in chap. 40 Xue Baochai denigrates the "continuations" (note Jin Shengtan's terminology) of the Shuihu zhuan and the Xixiang ji, and in chap. 47 Baochai reads and complains about some of the sequels to the Honglou meng. See Hu Wenbin. 16 On the tendency toward parody in some of the Honglou meng sequels, see Miller, pp. 206-7. 17 Many sequels or imitations contain synopses of the novels they wish to associate themselves with. See, e.g., "Qianshu shiliie" (Summary of the events in the previous book), in Xiaoyao Zi (pseud.), Hou Honglou meng (Continuation of the Honglou meng). Another sequel published in 1799 mentions the summary in the earlier sequel but declines to provide one (Qin Zichen,Janli, p. 10). The Mongol writer Injanasi (Chinese: Yinzhannaxi, 1837-92) provided a summary of the Honglou meng at the beginning of his imitation of that novel, Nigen Dabqur Asar (Chinese: Yiceng lou; One story further up the tower). On this novel, see Bawden. 18 See Xiaoyao Zi, Hou Honglou meng, particularly chap. 20. The novel ends with a banquet for Cao Xueqin at which he is presented with an elegant copy of the sequel. 19 E.g., Yinzhannaxi, Yiceng lou, 32.294. The name of the sequel, Ulayan-a Ukilaqu Tingkim (Chinese: Qihong ting; Pavilion for crying over the "red"), is given there, and the opening section of the sequel refers the reader back to the earlier novel. Both are imitations of the Honglou meng. 20 See Li Ruzhen, ]inghua yuan, 100.759; and also Chu Renhuo, Sui Tang yanyi (1985), 100.1073. 21 See Chapters 9 and 12 below on the incorporation of extratextual-type commentary within fictional texts.

90

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

Ping Mei as a commentary on the popular and influential morality book Taishang Ganying pian (The Lord-on-High's book of retribution). 22

Literary-Language Fiction The most famous traditional critics of fiction in China wrote commentaries on works of vernacular fiction. Pingdian commentaries on literary-language fiction, however, are fully as old and as widespread; what they lacked was bulk, complexity, and wide-scale appropriation and re-editing of the original texts. As writing, anthologizing, publishing, and commenting on literary-language fiction became a progressively more public and high-status activity, the relationship between commentary and text underwent some changes. An increasing sophistication in narrative skill allowed for the appearance of breakthrough collections of literary-language fiction such as Pu Songling's (1640-1715) Liaozhai zhiyi (Strange tales from Desultory Studio), which in turn stimulated critical interest and the production of commentary editions. The modern opposition between literary-language (wenyan) and vernacular (baihua) fiction did not exist in the traditional discourse on fiction. Authors and critics did claim one sort of language as appropriate to one tradition but not to another, 23 but the real distinction was between "refined and ornamented" (wenzao) writing for an elite and educated audience versus a more "popular" (tongsu) style that included simplified and denotative literary Chinese (Idema, Chinese Vern!tcular Fiction, p. 14). With the elevation of the status of vernacular fiction (see Chapter 4 below) and increasing literati input, this opposition became less rigid, and critics began to speak of an ideal style attractive to both refined and vulgar audiences (ya su gong shang). Transformation of literary-language tales into vernacular fiction is as old as the latter, but reverse adaptations are a late development. 24 Both this trend, along with the application to literary-language fiction of the fullblown pingdian commentary style first developed for vernacular fiction, and the influence of that commentary tradition on authors of literarylanguage tales (Tang Fuling, p. 259), represent a partial convergence of the two traditions in the Qing dynasty, which also saw the first full-length novels in literary Chinese outside historical fiction. 25 Most literary-language 22

See, e.g., Ding Yaokang, 64.650: and Chapter 12 below. E.g., SHZHPB 17, Jin Shengtan d/14 {John Wang, "How to Read," p. 134); and item 2 of Ding Yaokang'sfanli to his Xu fin Ping Mei, p. 5. Ding's remarks may have been influenced by Jin Shengtan's. 24 E.g., Xuan Ding's Yeyu qiudeng lu (A record made by the autumn lamp on rainy nights), a collection of literary-language fiction that appeared after the Liaozhai zhiyi, contains five adaptations of Sanyan stories; see Su Xing. 25 Such as Tu Shen's {1744-1801) Tanshi (The history of the bookworm). 23

Decline and Revival

91

fiction, however, is shorter and more unitary in structure, qualities that lessen the need for the guiding narrator of vernacular fiction or his extratextual counterpart, the pingdian commentator. The narrators in literary-language fiction were modeled on amateur rather than professional storytellers. In the typical Tang chuanqi story, the narrator makes an appearance only at the end of the story to explain its provenance or draw its moral. In the Qing dynasty, however, with Ji Yun's (1724-1805) Yuewei caotang biji (Random notes from the Cottage for the Scrutiny of the Infinitesimal) and its imitators, amateur storytellers and their audiences were highlighted, and commentary on the stories by both tellers and listeners became an integral part of this kind of fiction (see L. Chan).

Fiction Climbs into the Main Hall Fiction was traditionally considered outside the bounds of refined literature in China. Perhaps the most famous collector of fiction, Ma Lian (18931935), stamped the works in his collection with an identifying chop "Not fit to enter the main hall" (bu deng daya zhi tang). Writing fiction could get one into trouble, 26 and reading it was restricted to times when one had nothing better to do. 27 This changed somewhat in the late Ming, when increasing pluralism and interest in fads allowed a significant element of the literati to embrace fiction and drama wholeheartedly. Literati became the main producers and consumers of fiction, and something that might be called the "literati novel" was born. 28 Although the "literatization" of the novel brought prestige and complexity, these came at the cost of a loss of vigor and subversiveness and a reduction in the extent to which fiction was an alternative discourse. This tendency reached its apogee in the "scholar novel," whose literati authors took any and every opportunity to show off their learning (Hsia, "Scholar-Novelist"). In the Qing dynasty, there were critics who treated fiction as if it were scripture or part of the Confucian canon, Daoist interpreters of the Xiyou ji required the reader to burn incense and wash his hands before opening that novel (e.g., XYJZLHB 246, Liu Yiming df1; A. Yu, "How to Read," p. 299), and Nee-Confucian interpreters were said to be applying Han or Song 26

Li Zhen (1376-1452), author of Jiandeng yuhua (Supplement to The Wick-trimmer's Tales), was reportedly kept off the list of local worthies in a hometown shrine because of his authorship of this work of fiction {Hu Shiying, p. 361). 27 The full title of Guose tianxiang includes the words gongyu shenglan {for reading after one's public duties are fulfilled; Y. W. Ma, p. 207n15). Xie Zhaozhe {1567-1624), in his Wu zazu, relates that a certain figure of the Song dynasty read the classics and the histories sitting formally, works of fiction lying down, and ditties (xiaoci) in the privy (Hou Zhongyi, p. 31). 28 For a detailed attempt to chart the birth of this genre, see Plaks, Four Masterworks.

92

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

school classical exegesis to their novels. 29 Whereas the earliest group of commentators tended to be disaffected or unsuccessful, later fiction commentators include jinshi degree holders 30 and well-known kaoju (evidentiary studies) scholars. 31 Although some complained at the time about the application of kaoju criticism to fiction, 32 it became popular to publish or republish commentaries in which the earlier terms pingdian, pidian, and piping are replaced by words more suitable for exegetical commentaries such as pingzhu (comments and annotation) and pingshi (comments and explication). Straightforwardly exegetical commentaries on works of fiction were also published during this period. 33 As the status of fiction rose, so did the status of commentaries on fiction. Manuscripts were circulated among well-known literati for their comments, and collective commentaries were published. Although some of these were produced by an intimate circle of friends and relatives using obscure pen names, such as the Zhiyan zhai commentary on the Honglou meng, others, such as the collective commentary on Lii Xiong's (16421723) Nuxian waishi (Unofficial history of the female immortal), contain the comments of as many as 65 different people (Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, p. 362) signed by well-known figures such as the playwright Hong Sheng (1645-1704) using the same pen names they were publicly known by. 34 Another sign that fiction commentary was taken seriously is the appearance of commentaries reproducing previous commentaries in whole or in part. It is often the case in these that the later commentators show more interest in the earlier commentaries than in the literary text itself (Rolston, "Formal Aspects," pp. 68-69). 29 See, e.g., the Yuanhu Yuechi Zi preface to the manuscript version of Zhang Xinzhi's commentary on the Honglou meng, HLMSL 50. 30 Such as Dong Xun (1807-92), jinshi 1840 and longtime president of the Board of Revenue; see Chapter 12 below. 31 Such as Zhang Wenhu (1808-85), who wrote commentaries on both the Rulin waishi and the Xiyou bu, but also compiled scholarly editions of the Shiji and the Liji (RLWSYJZL 14). For bibliographical description of his Rulin waishi commentaries, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 448-50. 32 See Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, p. 582, for examples. On the deleterious effects of applying kaoju scholarship to fiction, see Chen Hong, Lilun shi, pp. 311-14. 33 For examples, see Rolston, "Sources," p. 8; for a bibliographical description of one, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 429. 34 The social nature of collaborative commentary is perhaps best described in item 11 of the fanli to Huang Zhen's (fl. 17th century) play, Shiliu hua (The pomegranate flower): "The emphatic punctuation and comments [on the play] were written by the various members of our literary club, whether while drinking in the presence of flowers, or under the moon chanting poetry. Written at the beck and call of inspiration, they are without any kind of system or order. With the passing of time it is no longer possible to distinguish whose comments are whose" (Cai Yi, p. 1929).

Decline and Revival

93

Increased Demands for Subtlety Many of the early fiction commentaries promised to teach readers not only how to read fiction but also how to write fiction. Commentators pointed out good and bad examples with the expectation that the readers who became writers would emulate the one and shun the other. They also claimed to point out subtle details missed by previous readers, an activity for which the pingdian commentary form was tailor-made. Commentators, to boost their own importance, promulgated the idea that authors were or should be "crafty" (jiaohua) persons who never directly state what they mean. Statements such as the following became common: "The author deliberately set an ingenious ambush so as to lure people into attacking him-a clear case of literary deception." 35 The reading and writing of fiction thus became a kind of literary game in which points were awarded the author for keeping his secrets hidden until the last moment and to the reader for being able to recognize, as soon as they first appeared, the relevance of subtle clues purposefully left by the author. This was an invitation, on the one hand, to overwrite and, on the other, to overread.

The Example of Cai Yuanfang Cai Yuanfang is of rather meager stature, in terms of either creativity or influence. He is, however, representative of the post-seventeenth century tendency toward mediocrity and the mechanical implementation of ideas about fiction proposed in the seventeenth century. Better known by his zi (courtesy name) than under his ming (personal name) of Cai Ao, Cai Yuanfang flourished in the eighteenth century and produced commentary editions of the Xiyou ji (preface 1750; see Rolston, How to Read, p. 453), the Lieguo zhi (preface 1736), 36 and the Shuihu houzhuan (1770). For the first of these he did little more than provide a preface and a dufa essay, but the other two include complete interlineal commentaries and substantial textual revision and became the standard editions for those novels. In terms of bulk and activity, he is a figure to be reckoned with. Although the model of Jin Shengtan looms large in his commentarial efforts and in his ideas on structure and literary technique (Widmer, Margins, pp. 184-87), his Shuihu houzhuan commentary, for instance, represents a mechanical rather than a creative application of that model. His commen-

35

Sixin, p. 580, Roupu tuan, chap. 8 cc (trans. from Hanan, Carnal Prayer Mat, 8.132). A revised edition (preface 1740) indicates the editor added new commentary "in order to fill in what was missed" by Cai (see Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, p. 462n1). 36

94

CHINESE FICTION COMMENTARY

tary on the Lieguo zhi seems to bear a similar relationship to the Mao commentary on the Sanguo yanyi. The Lieguo zhi is a historical novel like the Sanguo yanyi, but Cai Yuanfang saw even less place for artistic re-creation of the past than the Maos had in the other novel, and jnsisted that the reader take the Lieguo zhi as history and not as fiction (see, e.g., Dong Zhou Lieguo zhi, p. 1a, df 1). As for the Shuihu houzhuan commentary, instead of increasing the complexity of the text as Jin Shengtan had done with the Shuihu zhuan and Chen Chen with the Shuihu houzhuan (see Chapter 11 below), Cai Yuanfang reduced the Shuihu houzhuan's meaning (Widmer, Margins, p. 196). He diluted the subversive elements in the original by removing Chen Chen's commentary and any allusions to Ming loyalism and by reducing the contrast between the characters' world and that of the implied author. He did, however, conceive of the text and commentary of his edition as an integral unit, neither of which were to stand alone. When he made revisions, he tended to attack the problem both in the text and in his commentary (Widmer, Margins, p. 195). In sum, Cai Yuanfang represents an uninspired continuation of the model first created by Jin Shengtan.

International Influence In general, shorter fictional works in the literary language were most highly prized and widely read in the countries directly influenced by Chinese culture and language such as !ngue and groove), Shi'er lou, "Xiayi lou," 1.59 (Hanan, Tower, p. 6). For an instance of this term in Jin Shengtan's commentary, see SHZHPB 8.189, ic. Li Yu also used the term in Xianqing ouji, "Dianran" (Highlighting), p. 117. For a discussion of the use of this basic metaphor, see Plaks, "Terminology," p. 94. 50 fie (bring to a close), Shi'er lou, "Shengwo lou," 2.222 (Hanan, Tower, p. 235). The term is related to jieshu (same meaning; e.g., SHZHPB 43 .814, Jin Shengtan ic). fie also appears in a "Li Yu" marginal comment, SGYYHPB 15.186. 51 Bolan quzhe (waves and twists [in plot], Shi'er lou, "Fengxian lou," 1.200. For an early usage of bolan, see SHZHPB 22.426, Rongyu tang ed. me. Jin Shengtan lauded quzhe as the most prized quality in writing (JSTXXJ 3.3.177, pre-act comment). 52 Zhuke ~host and guest), Shi'er lou, "Wenguo lou," 3.248; peike (foil), Liancheng bi, 3.38. See Chapter 7 above. 53 Mingming, Shi'er lou, "Wenguo lou," 3.248. See item 2 of the "Fafan" to the Yuan Wuyai ed., SHZHPB 31. 54 Benzhuan Qiterally: own biography), Liancheng bi, 3.38. Li Yu seems to be using it partly as an alternative for the more common zhengzhuan (main story), but there might also be a connection with Jin Shengtan's application of terminology associated with historical biographies to the handling of fictional characters (see Chapter 5 above). For an instance of Jin Shengtan's use of benzhuan, see SHZHPB 51.948, cc. 55 (1) Zhuxin zhi fa (method of punishing intentions), Shi'er lou, "Shengwo lou," 1.213 (Hanan, Tower, p. 223). Jin Shengtan used the concept (e.g., SHZHPB 36.674, cc). (2) Zhongshang (upper-middle) and zhongxia Qower-middle), Wusheng xi, 5.78 (see Chapter 7 above). (3) Sheshen chudi (place yourself in the other's shoes), Wusheng xi, 11.184. This term is used by Jin Shengtan (SHZHPB 18.348, ic) and in Li Yu's writings on drama (Li Liweng quhua, "Yu qiu

Commentator-Narrators

301

When Hanan said of Li Yu that the "old, implicit duality of narrator and author has been replaced by an explicit duality of author-narrator and critic" (Invention, p. 134), he was speaking of the Rou putuan and seems to have had in mind the difference between Li Yu's narrator and the commentator in his extratextual commentary. 57 I think that, in light of the above discussion, we can also say that Li Yu's narrator combines within himself both author and critic.

Ding Yaokang, Xu fin Ping Mei, and Fiction as Commentary If Li Yu's narrator represents a convergence of the traditional narrator and the fiction commentator, Ding Yaokang's narrator (along with the implied author in his novel) presents himself openly as a commentator. The object of the commentary, however, is not Ding Yaokang's novel, but a morality text, the Taishang Ganying pian. We have seen how Ding Y aokang worked his name and himself into his novel (see Chapter 4). The original edition contained a portrait of him (Sun Yancheng, p. 320). He mentioned his authorship of the novel in his poems (Shi Ling, p. 335). He shared this openness about his fictional activities with Li Yu, as well as a serious interest in drama. 58 In fact, the two were acquainted with each other. 59 Ding Yaokang's novel was written during a three-month stay in Hangzhou (Qin Huasheng, p. 66) and was probably printed in late 1660 or early 1661 (Shi Ling, p. 335). Government disapproval of its sexual content (and its criticism of the Manchus' ancestors, the Jurchens) landed Ding Yaokang in jail for over 100 days in 1665 (Zhang Huijian, p. 727), an experience that left him blind. The novel itself was put to the torch, which turned the original edition into a rare book. Most readers came into contact with it through later versions under different titles. 60 Ding xiaosi," p. 86; "Ci bie fanjian," p. 86; and "Shengrong" [Voice and appearance], p. 108). (4) ]ian· xiong (evil hero), Shi'er lou, "Cuiya lou," 1.110. See Chapter 5 above. 56 Qianche (former example), Shi'er lou, "Fuyun lou," 5.153 (Hanan, Tower, p. 164). For an example of an earlier usage, see SGYYHPB 72.893 and 120.1457, "Li Zhi" cc. For discussion, see Chapter 7 above. 57 As noted above, Hanan has since changed his mind about the authorship of the Rou pu· tuan commentary. 58 Ding wrote chuanqi plays (many with projections of himself and some with his own commentary) and a treatise on drama (Qin Huasheng, pp. 62, 66-67, 70, 73). 59 See Zhang Huijian, p. 694; and Hanan, Invention, p. 216n37. Ding Yaokang and Li Yu's commentator, Du Jun, are mentioned together in the Xieye daoren (pseud.) preface to Zhaoshi bei, p. 105; see also the publisher's notice to this work, p. 1. 60 On the textual history of the Xu fin Ping Mei, see Sun Y ancheng; Shi Ling; and Rolston, "Oral Performing Literature," pp. 38-39. There are reportedly an incomplete edition with

302

FOUR SOLUTIONS

Yaokang is thought by some to also be the author of Xingshi yinyuan

zhuan. 61 The Xu jing Ping Mei contains a list of "reference works" (jieyong shu) designed, it seems, as political and moral cover for the subversive activity of writing the novel (the list does, however, include Li Zhi's Fenshu, officially proscribed at the time). 62 The Taishang Ganying pian heads the list of reference books. The claim that the novel is an annotation (zhujie) of this work occurs, among other places, in the prefaces to the novel (DingY aokang, pp. 1, 3) and in the first and final chapters (1.3, 64.650). The prefatory matter contains a piece labeled "wordless annotation" (wuzi jie) that features lists of good and bad deeds after the manner of morality books (shanshu). Besides ordinary titles, the chapters also carry short labels sometimes applied to more than one chapter that supposedly indicate the general idea of the chapter (Lin Chen, pp. 344-45). The labels all end with the word pin (category), a practice also to be found in popular didactic works such as baojuan (e.g., Liu Yinbo, pp. 240-46, quotation from a baojuan on the deity Erlang). Forty-eight of the 64 chapters of the novel begin with a quote from the Taishang Ganying pian. 63 The novel itself has a lot of sexual content. Ding Yaokang explained this odd mix of sex and morality in the fanli to the novel (p. 5) in terms very similar to those found in the prologue to the Rou putuan. In the novel he showed an awareness of how odd or even laughable (kexiao) this might seem to some (e.g., 29.265-66). The narrator equates himself with the author of the novel, which he identifies as a text (shu; e.g., 34.314), but the narrator also presents himself as elaborating his story orally as in the pseudo-oral tradition. His favorite verb for this process is Jiang Qecture; e.g., 1.3). Like Li Yu's narrator, Ding Yaokang's is not averse to taking time out to tell jokes (e.g., 50.483-84), but unlike Li Yu's fiction, the discursive interruptions in Xu fin Ping Mei were considered disruptive and were greatly

marginal comments held in Shanghai and an edition whose title page identifies it as a commentary edition by Zhang Zhupo, but I have not been able to examine them. I am not sure why Ellen Widmer (Margins, p. 287n46) states that the novel has commentary by the author. 61 See Zhang Qingji. The Xingshi yinyuan zhuan has a discursive prologue, the author intrudes at the very end under a pen name (Xingshi yinyuan zhuan, 100.1434), and the narrator refers the reader back to earlier passages of the printed (vs. oral) text (20.293, 27.393). See Plaks, "After the Fall," p. 562; andY. Wu, p. 60. 62 "Xu fin Ping Mei jieyong shumu," Ding Yaokang, pp. 7-9. The list works its way down from Taishang Ganying pian to Buddhist scripture to Daoist scripture to historical works to philosophical works (along with some fiction in literary Chinese) to collected works (Fenshu appears here) to drama and vernacular fiction. 63 Huang Lin, "Ding Yaokang," p. 57. More than half of the Taishang Ganying pian is quoted directly in the novel (see Ogawa Yoichi, pp. 338-40).

Commentator-Narrators

303

curtailed in a later rewriting of the novel, Gelian huaying. 64 The author of the Gelian huaying also addressed another problem with the Xu ]in Ping Mei: the narrative flow in Ding Yaokang's novel is extraordinarily discontinuous. It is rare for two chapters running to treat the same characters in the same setting (perhaps there is some influence from chuanqi drama here), and some chapters are completely isolated from the main story. The organization sometimes seems more topical than narrative. Perhaps Ding Y aokang thought such structural anarchy could be made tolerable by relying on an ever-present narrator to tie things together. 65 In any case, besides clipping the narrator's wings, Gelian huaying also straightens out the narrative flow (Sun Y ancheng, p. 331). Ding Yaokang's narrator refers to other parts of the novel by chapter number and informs the reader ahead of time that the novel is winding to a close (e.g., 55.557). His novel contains explicit references to the original fin Ping Mei as well as to itself (e.g., 33.311-12). He quotes texts as sources for stories in the expectation (serious or not) that this assures their credibility (12.91, 13.119), and he incorporates some of his other writings into his novel (Sun Yuming, p. 317). Understandably, Ding Yaokang's narrator is worried about the "misreading" of the ]in Ping Mei and his sequel to it. He begins chapter 1 with his interpretation of the fin Ping Mei as a cautionary work and then outlines the dangers of popular misreadings that, he concludes, betray the author's efforts (1.3). He then explains what his sequel is meant to accomplish. Like Zhang Zhupo after him, Ding Yaokang's narrator is upset that ordinary readers dislike reading the second half of the fin Ping Mei, in which retribution is portioned out (31.285). Also like Zhang Zhupo, he would limit the readership of his novel to readers with a certain level of insight (36.336). I have not seen any fiction commentary by Ding Y aokang. In his treatise on drama, however, he insisted that in the best kind of writing the resonance between what goes before and after (zhaoying) should be "dense" (mi), and threads (xiansuo) tying the work together should be unobtrusively inserted into the dialogue. 66 In the Xu ]in Ping Mei, his narrator uses two terms from fiction criticism found in Li Yu's fiction 67 and two that are not. 68 6 •

In item one of his fanli, Ding Y aokang himself recognized that the balance between discourse and story in the novel was keduo zhuxiao (a lot of guest [i.e., discourse] and little host [i.e., story], p. 5. 65 For instance, 50.484, where the narrator informs us that he is picking up a narrative thread dropped in chap. 26. 66 See principle 7 in his "Xiaotai ouzhu cili" (Randomly composed rules for drama composition), Chen Duo and Ye Changhai, p. 269. 67 Benzhuan, 2.17; andjie, 64.652, 653. See notes above. 68 (1) Caoshe huixian, 51.497; and (2) maifu Oay in ambush), 51.497, 59.603. In Ding Yaokang's usage, both refer to laying down subtle hints about what is to come so as to tie thenar-

304

FOUR SOLUTIONS

Wen Kang: Narrator-Commentator vs. Author The "pseudo-oral" tradition probably reaches its most extreme form in Wen Kang's Ernu yingxiong zhuan. In this tradition, the narrator elaborates on a written text created by an author, and the narrator and the author are two entirely different persons. The author is usually referred to by a pen name, whereas the narrator remains nameless, referring to himself in the first person or as the "narrator." 69 The Ernu yingxiong zhuan and other novels using this conceit are the only examples in traditional Chinese fiction in which a clear distinction is made throughout between narrator and author (Rolston, '"Point of View,"' pp. 120-24). References to the "author," Yanbei xianren ("Man of leisure from Yanbei"), saturate the Ernu yingxiong zhuan, although the first mention of his authorship of the novel is a little tentative (Wen Kang, P.l). The prologue describes his dream of the incarnation of the major figures of the novel, during which they look into a magic mirror to see their "true appearance" (benlai mianmu; P .3-4). One of the last images in the novel as we now have ie0 is the author seated by a lonely and sputtering lamp with a worn-out brush, exhausted by his labors. 71 The author is thus presented both as idle rative together. For the first term, see SHZHPB 20, df 53 (John Wang, "How to Read," pp. 140-41). For an early instance of the second, see SHZHPB 25.501, Yuan Wuyai ed. ic. 69 For an early example, see ]ingshi yinyang meng, a novel about Wei Zhongxian published within a year of his dea+h. An interesting "turn" is done on this concept in Wei Xiuren's Huayue hen, written about the same time as Ernu yingxiong zhuan. The first chapter of this novel is mostly discursive, except for the account at the end of how the narrator found the text buried in the ground, which he is now using to make money in the local teahouse by elaborating on it orally. The mysterious origins of this anonymous text are explained in the last chapter. Outside of chap. 1, however, the narrator is not very prominent. In this novel the characters talk about writing commentary on the Honglou meng and in the process use the terminology of fiction criticism (e.g., Wei Xiuren, 25.213-14, where the term zhu'nao is used by one of the characters). 70 Prefaces to the novel, as well as remarks in a 39-chapter incomplete manuscript copy, indicate that the novel was originally to have been 54 chapters long (including the prologue) with a total of 108 sentences in the chapter couplets. See the Ma Congshan and Wuliaoweng (pseud.) prefaces, pp. 1 and 5; P.10n4 (where the manuscript is quoted); and the editor's postface, pp. 1068-70. The mention at the end of the prologue in the manuscript copy of the number of sentences in the chapter titles is an abbreviated way of imitating Jin Shengtan's listing of the chapter titles at the end of his new prologue for the Shuihu zhuan, SHZHPB P.S0-53. Even in the 40-chapter version, the last sentence of the prologue echoes the conclusion of Jin Shengtan's Shuihu zhuan prologue (cf. SHZHPB P.53 and Wen Kang, P.9). The prologue in the original serialized version of Zeng Pu's (1872-1935) Niehai hua imitates Jin Shengtan's prologue for the Shuihu zhuan by listing the chapter couplets for the entire work (Wei Shaochang, Niehai hua, pp. 6-10). 71 Wen Kang, 40.1043. The worn-out brush is also mentioned on 28.614. Elsewhere the narrator speaks of the author as "producing stinky sweat" as he composes his novel (40.980, 1019).

Commentator-Narrators

305

("man of leisure") 72 and as exhausting his life's blood on narrative subtlety.73 Critics agree that the novel is fairly autobiographical and that there is a strong sense of identification between the author and some of the characters, particularly An Xuehai, the patriarch of the family upon whom the novel focuses (see, e.g., Zhu Shizi, p. 653). Wen Kang was from a prominent Manchu family that had produced high ministers over several generations, but his own official career was quite rocky. He does not seem to have written any fiction besides this novel or any fiction commentary, but he did publish an anthology of poetry that contains "several hundred characters" of commentary (Wen Kang, editor's preface, p. 1062). It has been thought that Wen Kang is the author of the Guanjianwo zhai (pseud.) preface to the novel (e.g., Fang Zhengyao, Xiaoshuo piping, p. 143 n1), which is an interesting document. It begins with the birth of writing, mentions Sima Qian and the concept of zhuxin (see Chapter 5), and speaks of several famous novels (i.e., the Shuihu zhuan, ]in Ping Mei, Xiyou ji, and the Honglou meng) as analogous to esteemed historical texts. The writer goes on to stress how fortunate some of these novels were to get commentarial attention from the likes of Jin Shengtan, Zhang Zhupo, and Chen Shibin/4 whereas the Honglou meng has been unfortunate precisely because no commentator of their stature has commented on it. The novels mentioned are described as needing commentary because of a disjuncture between their surface meaning and their true significance. The preface writer insists that this is not a problem with Ernu yingxiong zhuan; 75 one reason 72 On P.9, the interruption of his dream is mentioned as symbolic of his failure to achieve anything and an explanation for why he ended up as a man of leisure. His leisure is also stressed on 28.614 and 32.722, among other places. In this conception of the author, Wen Kang was no doubt influenced by the implied author that Jin Shengtan created for the Shuihu zhuan (see Chapter 4). 73 E.g., 28.614. Elsewhere the narrator says that even if the author was at his leisure (xian), he was unwilling to spend time on "leisurely" writing (xianbi xianmo; 30.676). The prolixity of a certain chapter is explained by the narrator by claiming that the author had nothing else to do (xianzhe meide zuo) and so decided to compose this tricky and deceitful (jiaokuai) piece of writing (wenzhang) in order to give himself trouble. In an interlineal comment, Dong Xun wrote, "For giving yourself trouble, there's nothing like writing" {22.456). li Jin Shengtan's influence on the Ernu yingxiong zhuan should be apparent. Some of the narrator's remarks seem to show the influence of Zhang Zhupo. For instance, the way the narrator likes to go through the author's options in a kind of logical fashion (e.g., 29.645-46) reminds one of passages in Zhang Zhupo's commentary such as JPMZLHB 37-38, df 48 (Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 228-30). Although the Xiyou ji is mentioned once (10.181), neither the novel nor its commentators seem to have exerted much direct influence on Wen Kang. 75 Wen Kang, pp. 2-4. The preface is backdated to the Yongzheng reign period, also said to be the time at which the story ends (e.g., 1.11, 40.1034). This particular narration of the story (see below) is dated to within 100 years after the entrance within the passes of the Manchus {29.637).

306

FOUR SOLUTIONS

why it could be said not to need commentary is because it provides its own. Fiction commentators traditionally spoke of their work as showing the reader the "needle" (technique) by which the "embroidery" (text) was made, in opposition to the common idea that the "embroiderer" (author) is jealous of his secrets and unwilling to show his "needle" to others. 76 According to Dong Xun, 77 author of the earliest extane8 commentary on the novel, Y anbei xianren never begrudged letting other people see his needles (21.439, ic). In the very first paragraph of prose (P.1), the narrator describes the Ernu yingxiong zhuan broadly as a work of fiction (xiaoshuo) and more specifically as a pinghua (oral narrative without musical accompaniment or narrative verse). As often done in fiction commentaries, the narrator says that although the novel is a work of fiction, it should be carefully distinguished from ordinary fiction, which is said to talk about such things as unprovable supernatural events (5.96, 24.500) and sex (40.1024), and to use stereotyped language (36.848) and plot formulas (16.319). Numerous remarks made by both the narrator and the characters criticize the language and the fictional world of popular oral narrative, referred to most often as gu'rci (drum texts; 9.178, 11.206 [narrator], 16.311, 20.407 [narrator], 21.429 [narrator], 33.765 [narrator], 36.849, 40.997). Given its use of the pseudo-oral model, the novel naturally abounds in references to the textuality of Yanbei xianren's text, as opposed to the narrator's oral exposition. 79 The.favorite term for the author's text is wenzhang, 80 which 76 For one formulation of this idea, "When the embroidery of the mandarin ducks has been completed, I'll let you see them, but I won't give you the needle," and a protest against this attitude, see JSTXXJ 15, df 23. A variation appears in Emu yingxiong zhuan (21.441) as the chapter-ending couplet. 77 Dong Xun is rather unusual among fictional commentators in that he passed the jinshi examination, held high office, made concrete and specific references to his official career in his commentary (e.g., 1.19, ic), cited specific pages in references to other pans of the novel (e.g., 24.505), and dated the completion of the commentary (40.1043, where he mentions his age as 74 sui). Like many other commentators, however, he edited the text of the novel he was commenting on (see 35.820, 833n10, and editor's preface, p. 1068). 78 The 39-chapter manuscript promises "closing commentary" (guijie piyu), by Wuliaoweng (P.10n4), but nothing of the son is extant. Wuliaoweng is the author of one of the prefaces and is mentioned on the title page (editor's preface, p. 1067) and in the prologue (P.1, 9) as the editor of the text. 79 The narrator sometimes indulges in what he calls "annotations" (zhushu) to the text (e.g., 37.878-80), although these are supposedly presented orally and not written down. In one case (4.78), his legwork includes looking up a term in Yang Xiong's Fangyan (the earliest extant text on dialects). He also describes this as kaocha or kaoju, terms for the activities of scholars of "evidentiary studies," but these references are tongue-in-cheek. 80 E.g., 10.182, 12.231, 13.239, 21.418, 28.624, 37.866, 37.887, 37.894, and 38.905. Wenzhang can also refer to the nontextual content or structure of a story, a usage employed by both the narrator (e.g., P.9, 19.379) and the fictional characters (23.473, 36.583).

Commentator-Narrators

307

usually refers to respected prose genres. The novel is even provided with "readers" -the heavenly figure who supervises the incarnation of the characters in the prologue tells his consort, "Let's you and I enjoy ourselves sitting up here in heaven in perfect freedom and read/watch [kan] the case of these heroic lovers [ernu yingxiong]; 81 in just a bit it will get really interesting" (P.5). The Ernu yingxiong zhuan also acknowledges its textuality by setting itself up as a corrective to the Honglou meng. 82 The shadow of the Honglou meng hovers over the entire novel, 83 with its name, characters, and places explicitly mentioned in the text, sometimes in the form of detailed comparisons between the two novels designed to favor the Ernu yingxiong zhuan. 84 The relationship between the two works was summed up by an unnamed interlocutor in a commentary on the Honglou meng by none other than WangJingwei. The interlocutor remarks that if all of the main characters in the Honglou meng could have acted in the same way as their counterparts in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan, there would have been no love tragedy and no need for free love (Honglou meng xinping, Lunzhu xuan, 2: 427). The narrator also compares characters to figures in other novels (e.g., 10.181), novels are found lying about (39.959), one character cites a novel as if it were a reference work (38.920), and the thoughts of characters are said to have been influenced by reading specific works of fiction (28.602). The novel is very "talky"; extensive sections consist of recapitulations by the fictional characters of prior events, 85 and the characters doing the recapitulation are often likened to oral storytellers by the narrator and other characters. 86 One of the longest of these embedded narratives takes up the bulk of two chapters (15.292-16.307) and is described in a chapter title as an oral narration (yanshuo; 15.278), the same words used to describe the whole text in the chapter title for the prologue (P.1) No aspect of the act of narration fails to be the object of play in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan. The narrator discusses characters, or they themselves make

81

The category of "heroic lovers" includes the goddess Ni.iwa and the Buddha (P.5-6). On the relationship between these two novels, see Ying Bicheng; Epstein, pp. 281-89; and McMahon, Misers, pp. 265-82. 83 It is listed as one of the "imitations" (/angshu) of the Honglou meng; see HLMSL 147. 84 E.g., Wen Kang, 23.469, 24.557-58, 34.786-87. The interpretation of Xue Baochai as deceitful and dangerous (yinxian) comes from commentaries on that novel (see Chapter 8 above). 85 The narrative challenges posed by this heavy use of recapitulation are clearly recognized in the novel, even if this recognition is expressed in devious (yet fairly transparent) ways. For instance, when the narrator says that one character's overhearing another character's story saves (sheng) that character from having to tell it directly to the other one, Dong Xun breaks in to say, "Lies! Lies! What has really been saved is Yanbei xianren's brush and ink" (23.479). 86 E.g., 18.371 (narrator), 15.296 (other characters), and 25.525 (self-referential). Dong Xun (33.758 ic) compared one of the characters to the famous professional storyteller Liu Jingting (ca. 1587-ca. 1670). 82

308

FOUR SOLUTIONS

remarks, in such a way as to imply an awareness of their presence in a fictional story (e.g., 8.147, 9.162, 15.296, 16.313, 19.376, 20.411, 36.836). The narrator sometimes pretends the events he is describing are happening in real time. He says, for example, that he must wait to get back to certain characters' stories until they finish doing something else (24.500), or he is leery of interrupting their conversation (30.677) or lovemaking (40.1010) with his remarks, or he will take advantage of their looking for a piece of paper to fill in the audience about something (16.318). Sometimes characters are talked about as if they were autonomous and their actions could either thwart the author's plans or require correction from him (28.617, 40.1041). Even though he is supposedly reading from the author's text, the narrator at one point says the author has not gotten around to writing the part of the story he is now telling (33.757). On the other hand, several times he claims ignorance about future developments, telling his audience that he and they will just have to wait until the problem is explained (e.g., 20.406, 23.474). This contradicts other remarks in which he mentions previous tellings of the story, in particular his recounting of one incident in which he made a "correction" to the text to which a learned listener later objected (34.774). In this example and elsewhere (e.g., 31.680), the narrator's listeners are personalized to a greater extent than in any work except the Doupeng xianhua (Idle talk under the bean arbor), 87 in which a small cast of characters take turns telling stories to each other. Sometimes the narrator in the Ernu yingxio12g zhuan justifies recapitulating some element of the story because not all of his listeners were able to hear the tale right from the beginning (e.g., 12.231, 16.318-19). The narrator in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan is not unique because he makes comments on fictional technique, but he is unusual in how openly and frequently he does so. This feature was recognized early 88 and continues to be remarked (e.g., Chen Hong, Lilun shi, p. 342). However, the existence of a close relationship between fiction commentary and the narratorial commentary in this novel, although also recognized by some, 89 still remains to be fleshed out. 87 Hanan (Chinese Vernacular Story, p. 20) claims this collection of stories is the only example of vernacular fiction in which the audience is individualized. 88 Dong Xun (29.629, ic) contrasted the novel with Xingshi yinyuan zhuan and other unnamed works that use discourse to "discuss affairs" (lunshi) rather than to "discuss writing" (lunwen), a practice he felt originated with the Ernu yingxiong zhuan. He also praised the novel for teaching writing by example (xianshen shuofa) and for mixing seriousness (zhuang) and humor (xie). 89 See Idema, Chinese Vernacular Fiction, p. 132n13, where he contrasts the practice in this novel with the comments written by Jin Shengtan and Chu Renhuo regarding the changes they made in the novels they edited or compiled. More extended treatment is offered in Epstein, "Beauty Is the Beast." She states that "the narrator ... even explicitly discusses the plots

Commentator-Narrators

309

Like the fiction commentators, the narrator in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan asserts that fiction, like other prose writing, has its rules of composition (faze). 90 Like them, he also asserts that fiction is comparable to history, and his novel, beyond being in accord with the rules of fiction, is also in accord with the rules for composition inherent in Sima Qian's historical writing, 91 as opposed to the overconcise style of Song Qi, also criticized by Jin Shengtan (see Chapter 5 above). Like them, he speaks of certain sections of the text as the biography (zhuan) of a particular character. 92 Like them, he also turns to examples from painting to describe what should be done in narrative. 93 Like them, he believes that fiction is essentially the borrowing of a topic Uie timu) in order to transmit a message (e.g., 26.588, 28.617; see Chapter 2 above), and that a disjunction exists between the surface meaning of the text and a deeper meaning underneath (e.g., 10.181, 29.655, 33.748, 38.905). The narrator is very concerned with the relationship of parts of the novel to the whole. 94 He stresses how sections of the novel are connected to what has come before and what will come after, using fiction commentary terminology for the foreshadowing of later events (e.g., fubi, 16.318; and zhangben, 23.467, 25.527), retroactive resonance and supplementation, 95 the insertion of events in the middle of larger sections of narrative (e.g., chuan-

and sub-plots in terms of traditional novel criticism" {p. 276). She also includes an appendix {pp. 333-36) with translations of three passages from chaps. 9, 12, and 16 in which fictional characters or the narrator speak of the story in this way. Unfortunately, she fails to distinguish between Y anbei xianren and the narrator. 90 Wen Kang, 16.318. An alternative term, wenfa, is used in an ironic context to refer to conventions for writing fiction {38.902). 91 Wen Kang, 26.588, 29.629, 37.896. On the importance of Sima Qian in fiction criticism, see Chapter 5 above. The narrator also uses the following terms discussed in that chapter: fa zai zhuxin, P.8, 37.896; shanshan e'e, 32.722; and yuduo, 37.896. 92 See Chapter 5 above for the importance of this terminology in fiction criticism. Terms related to the historiographical terms discussed there used by the narrator of the Emu ying· xiong zhuan include zhengzhuan {proper biography), 14.255, 16.318, 25.538, 29.629, 29.654; xiaozhuan (small biography), 18.369; shijia tili (hereditary house style [of biography], 29.629; andfuzhuan (appended biography), 16.318. The narrator spends much time arguing with imagined objectors whether a section is really part of a certain character's zhengzhuan {e.g., 29.654). 93 E.g., 33.740, where the narrator compares how parts of the novel relate to each other the way parts of a tree do in a painting. See Rolston, How to Read, p. 504, sub-entries under "Fiction criticism, adaptation of terminology from other discourses," for "painting," "gardening," and "horticulture" for the importance of such metaphors in fiction criticism. 94 He uses jiegou and jianjia {12.231, 16.318), common fiction criticism terms, to describe the overall structure of the novel. 95 E.g., zhaozu, 12.231; yingbi, 16.318; bu, 31.680; and ying, 40.1036. The sense that all earlier hints have to be followed up is so strong that the narrator at one point accuses the author of having forgotten about something mentioned some time earlier {29.645-46), which is just another way to remind the reader of the incident.

310

FOUR SOLUTIONS

cha, 20.404, 23.471, 32.727, 37.893, 40.1033, 40.1036), and the way narrative sections are supposed to dovetail or lock together (e.g., tiaodou, 17.337; dui maosun, 26.557; dou ... maosun, 33.757) and be connected by lines of energy (e.g., jinmo, 16.319; qimo, 21.438) or objects (wujian). 96 The words he uses to talk about summations, climaxes, and denouements are likewise all common in traditional fiction criticism, 97 as is his advice to his audience (readers) to apprehend the contours of the story from a long-range point of view so as to perceive its organic unity (e.g., 16.319, 26.558). Fiction commentators lauded variation in narrative pace and mode, and so does the narrator of the Emu yingxiong zhuan. The poles of variation recognized by both are very similar and include activity (mang) and leisure (xian; e.g., 8.164); narrative frugality (sheng) and prolixity (fan; e.g., 12.231, 23.479); and direct (shi) and indirect (xu) portrayal. 98 The same kinds of terms are used by both fiction commentators and the narrator to refer to minor (e.g., bo [waves], 6.122) and major99 variations in the flow of the plot line. It might be objected that many of these terms are common enough both in everyday speech 100 and in traditional discourses on aesthetics other than fiction criticism. 101 What leaves little room for doubt is the fact that these terms (and concepts) are employed in exactly the same way and with the same object as in earlier fiction commentaries. The narrator is obviously interested in having his audience (readers) appreciate the novel in terms of the criteria establisheci, by fiction criticism and recognize its superiority to its competition. It is also clear that the implied reader constructed in the text is a reader who is at home in the world of fiction commentary. The kind of advice to the audience (reader) given by the narrator, such as to suspend disbelief (e.g., 29.646), to put himself in the character's shoes (e.g., 37.896), to be sure to remember this or that (e.g., 21.426), to look at incidents in the text in their broader context (e.g., 26.558), to be sure not to be 96 E.g., 21.418, 26.558, 37.893. The second instance involves a comparison with wujian in the Honglou meng (see Epstein, pp. 287-88). 97 E.g., jieshu, 12.231, 20.415, 28.624, 29.629, 36.862, 37.866; guijie, 37.887, 38.914; shouchang, 21.438, 24.519, 40.1043; yuba (after-ripples), 37.866. For structural terms and concepts in fiction criticism, see Chapter 10 above. 98 E.g., 16.319. On terminology dealing with narrative mode and pace, see Plaks, "Terminology," pp. 102-11. 99 E.g., huandou yixing (make the dippers revolve and the stars move), 6.122. Note the similarity between this and Mao Zonggang's xingyi douzhuan (SGYYHPB 12-13, df 11; Roy, "Romance," pp. 173-78). 100 Some appear in the thoughts or speech of characters in the novel, e.g., 9.162 (fan, shouchang) and 16.313 (chuancha). 101 For instance, in the portrayal of two discourses that appear quite explicitly in the novel, examination essay criticism and oral storytelling, terms quoted as proper to those two fields also appear in the work of fiction critics.

Commentator-Narrators

311

fooled by the wily author (e.g., 29.645), and to guess what has not yet been revealed (e.g., 29.636), is entirely in accord with the demands made upon readers in fiction commentary. 102 Narrator-commentators did not completely die out after the Ernu yingxiong zhuan. For instance, the popularity into the Republican period of using the beginning of the novel as a preface in which to explain the origin of the text and offer guidance on how to read it has been mentioned in previous chapters. 103 However, the Ernu yingxiong zhuan certainly represents the most completely developed example of an author's decision to react to fiction commentary by incorporating it into his text. 102

See Chapter 4 above. Like the fiction commentator, the narrator in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan maintains a certain level of superiority vis-a-vis his readers. He takes pride, for instance, in pointing out things that he expects his audience (readers) to have missed (e.g., 5.94). 103 Sometimes the closing segment of a novel was used for the same purpose. For a fairly early example, see the closing section prefaced by the author's zi (Zhonghua yue ... ) in Yu Wanchun, "Epilogue" ("Jiezi"), pp. 1037-38, in which his work is compared to other sequels to the Shuihu zhuan.

13 Latent Commentary:

The "Rulin waishi"

The previous chapter argued that certain authors incorporated functions once the province of the extratextual commentator into the text itself through the creation of narrator-commentators and pointed to a number of concrete and observable features in those narrators to back up this hypothesis. The task of this chapter is far harder, because there is no objective evidence for its central thesis that certain writers, under the influence of fiction commentary, purposefully left interpretive space for readers to fill in through the construction of their own commentary based on unobtrusive clues in the text. I think we can not only describe certain categories of holes in these texts with a :bir degree of precision, but also show that they were designed to be filled with mortar prepared under the influence of fiction commentary. What needs to be proved first is that there were holes in these texts that needed to be filled in by the reader, and that they were the kinds of holes a reader trained by reading fiction commentaries would be prepared to fill. We will also need to prove that the individual works were influenced by fiction commentary. It will also help to show that the works in question were easily understood and accepted by readers acquainted with traditional fiction commentary but caused problems for readers who were not. This chapter will present the Rulin waishi as an example of fiction written with latent commentary because it seems to me to be the most convincing case. My decision not to discuss other works in this chapter does not mean that the Rulin waishi is unique. It is just that I lack the ingenuity and space at this time to present a convincing argument vis-a-vis other examples (in Chapter 14, however, we will see how latent commentary appears in the Honglou meng as one of several responses to extratextual commentary). The Rulin waishi is a good example for a number of reasons. First, it represents perhaps the most extreme development of the suppression of the tra-

Latent Commentary: The "Rulin waishi

JJ

313

ditional narrator (see Chapter 9). 1 Second, the composition of the Rulin waishi was clearly influenced by Jin Shengtan's commentary edition of the Shuihu zhuan. Third, a number of traditional commentaries to the Rulin waishi have survived and are accessible; they show that premodern readers did not have the problems with this text that modern readers have had. They also can help us get an idea of the kind of implied reader constructed in the text. That fictional works might have latent commentaries should not come as a surprise. Reading is the construction of a kind of mental commentary. Paul Valery, a devotee of marginal commentary, once said, "One might observe ... that the attentive reading of a book is nothing but a continuous commentary, a succession of notes escaping from the inner voice. Marginal notes are part of the notes of pure thought" (Lipking, p. 610). Likewise, the conception of an inverse relationship between intratextual and extratextual commentary (mental or written) is nothing new. In the words of Ross Chambers: If commentary is not supplied [in the text], there is in the text a kind of degre zero of "commentary"-or perhaps "appel d'commentaire," as one speaks of "appel d'air," would be the better term-since clearly the receiver of the message is then under a strong compulsion to supply the commentary felt to be missing, that is, to replace the absent "commentary" in the text by an act of "interpretation" of his own. 2

The Rulin waishi and Extratextual Commentary The earliest extant edition of the Rulin waishi was published by the W oxian caotang in 1803. 3 The only prefatory matter is a preface by Xianzhai laoren dated 1736. The text is unpunctuated, and aside from rare and brief interlineal comments, the only commentary takes the form of post-chapter comments for 50 of the 56 chapters. The commentary is unattributed, but, judg1 In Chapter 11, we saw how in the Xiyou bu holes in the text left by the suppression of the traditional narrator were filled by extratextual commentary by the author. 2 Chambers, p. 327. On the same page Chambers mentions "yet another form of absent commentary, the implicit commentary. Irony is an example .... The absence of commentary makes for an enigmatic effect .... One obvious characteristic of 'modern' literature is precisely its elusiveness with regard to interpretation." He also points out the "denial" of commentary in the novels of Alain Robbe-Grillet, a writer who confines himself almost entirely to the "mode of presentation," to use Hanan's terminology. 3 The novel did circulate in manuscript, but the only extant copy was prepared after the printed edition of 1803. In his postface to the novel, Jin He mentioned an earlier printed edition, published between 1768 and 1779 in Yangzhou by Wu Jingzi's friendJin Zhaoyan (1718after 1789; RLWSYJZL 130). However, aside from a vague mention of a copy of the "original Yangzhou edition" by Xu Yunlin in a postface written on his collated copy, which completely neglects the crucial question of how many chapters it contained (RLWSYJZL 141), there is no other indication that such an edition ever existed.

314

FOUR SOLUTIONS

ing by a reference to a published work in the comments for chapter 30, it was completed sometime after 1785. 4 The Xianzhai laoren preface is interesting because in a brief space it differentiates the novel from its competition and introduces the themes and concerns of the novel. The writer challenged the reader to compare the Rulin waishi with the most famous novels up to that time, collectively referred to as the si da qishu. Two of these, the Xiyou ji and the Sanguo yanyi, are quickly dropped from the discussion because they are very different from a novel of manners such as the Rulin waishi. The writer of the preface was confident, however, that those who praise the structure, technique, and successful characterization of those two "extraordinary books" do so only because they have not yet read the Rulin waishi. The discussion of all four novels shows the influence of the most popular commentary editions of them. If the preface was indeed by Wu Jingzi himself, as some have argued, 5 then it would be not only an instance of an author's using extratextual commentary to keep the readers' interpretations within certain bounds but also evidence of his knowledge of the fiction commentary tradition. Since Wu Jingzi died in 1754, he did not see (or write) the entire Woxian caotang commentary to the novel. 6 In any case, the commentary consists of a preface, a few interlineal comments, and an incomplete set of chapter comments. As the proliferation of later commentaries proves, this was not enough to satisfy all readers. A commentary on the novel by Huang Xiaotian (ming, Fumin; hao, Pingsou; 1795-1867) has recently been published. Huang Xiaotian's comments, along with the 1881 version of the Zhang Wenhu commentary, were transcribed onto a copy of the 1869 Qunyu zhai edition of the novel (Rolston, How to Read, pp. 447-48). Zhang Wenhu mentioned Huang Xiaotian's name several times, and the 1885 version of Zhang's commentary on the Rulin waishi, Rulin waishi xinping (New commentary on the Rulin waishi), contains a preface by Huang Xiaotian's son, Huang Anjin. Both that preface and some of Zhang Wenhu's remarks indicate that the two versions (1881 and 1885) of the Zhang Wenhu commentary contain remarks by Huang Xiao~Rolston, How to Read, p. 281n159. The same volume contains a bibliographical description of the edition (pp. 446-47), a translation by Shuen-fu Lin of the post-chapter comments (pp. 252-94), and an introduction and a translation of the Xianzhai laoren preface (pp. 244-

51). 5 E.g., Yao Xueyin, p. 50; and Liu Shide, "Wu Jingzi," p. 323. Ye Song claims that even the calligraphy of the preface is Wu Jingzi's. These scholars handle the problem of the early date of the preface (the novel is first mentioned in 1749) in a variety of ways. 6 Huang Lin and Han Ton gwen have argued that the preface and the commentary are from the same hand (Lunzhu xuan 1: 463n1). They also claim both are probably by a close friend of Wu Jingzi's (1: 474n1). Chen Hong (Lilun shi, pp. 278-79) argues that the commentary itself is not by one author.

Latent Commentary: The "Rutin waishi"

315

tian, and indeed, three comments signed "Pingsou" occur in both. That, however, is not the extent of Huang Xiaotian's influence on Zhang Wenhu. A comparison of the Huang Xiaotian and Zhang Wenhu commentaries shows that a fair proportion of Zhang Wenhu's comments were originally in reference to or borrowed from the older man's comments (Huang Xiaotian, Rulin waishi, editor's introduction, pp. 4-7). Huang Xiaotian was particularly interested in the relationship of the Rulin waishi to the Shuihu zhuan. Zhang Wenhu's commentary on the novel was first published in 1881 in the second Shenbao guan (Shanghai) edition of the novel (Rolston, How to Read, pp. 448-49), but before then it had been passed back and forth in manuscript form among Zhang Wenhu's friends in Shanghai and other aficionados of the Rulin waishi. Zhang W enhu was particularly interested in the models for the characters in the novel. He also paid attention to narrative technique. The 1881 version of the commentary consists of short notes (zhi), interlineal comments, and chapter comments. Xu Yunlin, a fellow resident of Shanghai, thought highly of the Zhang Wenhu commentary. An 1881 note by Zhang Wenhu mentioning the publication of his commentary also indicates Xu Yunlin had expressed interest in publishing it (RLWSYJZL 139), and Xu may have been behind this 1881 publication of the commentary. A collated collection of Zhang Wenhu's comments copied by Xu onto a printed edition of the novel is still extant in the library of Shanghai Teachers University. This copy also preserves a few comments made by himself and some of his friends (all included in RL WSHPB).

Zhang Wenhu's comments were published for the second time in 1885 under the title Rulin waishi xinping. This version does not contain the complete text of the novel. Instead, before each comment, cues are given to allow the reader to establish their context. A year later, Xu Yunlin produced arevised version with a note from himself and without the word xin (new) in the title. 7 Comments from an anonymous contributor (who might also have been the editor) reminiscent more of Grub Street than the scholar's study appear in the 1874 Qixing tang edition of the novel (for a brief description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 448). This edition contains marginal and chapter comments, as well as a list of general principles ("Liyan") that includes justifications for several changes in the text and the original 1803 commentary that it reprints (RLWSYJZL 132, esp. item 2). The 1888 sixty-chapter version of the novel by the Hongbao zhai in Shanghai copies the "Liyan" (with 7 For a brief description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 449. The comments from the two major versions of Zhang Wenhu's commentaries are included in RLWSHPB. References to his comments below will only distinguish the earlier and later versions of the commentary if there is a specific reason to do so.

316

FOUR SOLUTIONS

slight modifications) and comments of the 1874 edition, without bothering to add comments for the four new chapters. 8 There also exists a manuscript commentary on the novel in the hand of Wang Xie (zi, Bohang, 1884-1944), who also recorded his comments (in several different colors of ink) on the Hongtou meng (Rolston, How to Read, pp. 450, 490-91). The comments on the Rutin waishi were copied onto a 60chapter version of the novel, but almost all of them have been copied directly from the Rutin waishi ping, and, with the exception of the comments to the four interpolated chapters, there is almost no new material. Almost a century separates the last original commentary on the Rutin waishi from the most recent one, Chen Meilin's Xinpi Rutin waishi (1989), which has extensive interlineal and post-chapter comments. Although the number of commentators on the Rutin waishi pales before that for the Hongtou meng, their number is not smalU Many novels only attracted one commentator. The later commentators were aware of the earlier commentators. Even though Zhang Wenhu, for example, approved of Huang Xiaotian's comments, he said he thought the earlier commentary was not exhaustive enough. 10 Although later commentators are sometimes critical toward their predecessors, they (even Chen Meilin) all belong to a clearly defined and basically unbroken tradition. Beginning in the late Qing on through Hu Shi and Lu Xun and up until the past decade or so, it was common to criticize the Rutin waishi for having a loose or episodic structure (see S. Lin, "Ritual and Narrative Structure," pp. 244-48). There has also been a continuing debate over the theme of the novel (see, e.g., Fu Jifu; and Shang Daxiang). Japanese and Western scholars have complained of the difficulty of deciding who the positive characters are or what the author actually approved o£. 11 Many modern scholars have expressed dissatisfaction with the 56-chapter text of the Rutin waishi by taking seriously unsubstantiated notices that the

8 For a brief bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 449-50. The four interpolated chapters (RL WSHPB 794-824) show both a rather mechanical attempt to link them up to the other 56 chapters and an almost complete disregard for Wu Jingzi's handling of narrative voice and chronology. 9 Commentaries on the novel that have not survived are mentioned in the preface to the 1874 Qixing tang edition (RLWSYJZL 131); and "Wenchang dijun yujin yinshu Tianlii zhengzhu" (Notes to the God of Literature's edict against lewd books), quoted in Wang Liqi, p. 425. 10 See his colophon to the Jin He postface (RL WSYJZL 137). Ping Buqing, although he did not write a separate commentary on the novel, was so moved by Zhang Wenhu's commentary as to include comments on it and the novel in his Xiawai junxie (Collected gleanings). For bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, p. 450. 11 See Slupski, p. 124, where he talks of the "problem of narrative authority," and the discussion of lnada Takashi's (who translated the novel into Japanese) interpretation of the novel in Ropp, pp. 212-13, and T. Wong, pp. 66-69.

Latent Commentary: The "Rulin waishi"

317

novel once had 50 chapters 12 or 55 chapters 13 and trying to excise parts of the novel they dislike by claiming they are later interpolations. 14 Such activity is almost totally lacking in the traditional critics. 15 The first modern scholar to attempt a systematic analysis of the Rutin waishi in terms of a traditional aesthetics of the novel was Shuen-fu Lin ("Ritual and Narrative Structure in Rulin waishi"). His essay was translated into Chinese in both China (1982) and Taiwan (1984) and generated a large amount of interest. He contrasts what he describes as a Western-oriented prejudice in late Qing and Republican criticism of the structure of the Rulin waishi with what he lays out as more truly native patterns of organization characterized by the predominance of synchronicity over causality (p. 250). Although only occasionally directly quoted, the categories and viewpoint of the Woxian caotang commentary can be seen behind many of the particular features of his analysis of the structure of the novel, and he later translated the chapter comments for How to Read the Chinese Novel. The material presented above demonstrates three things. Although Wu Jingzi may have had a hand in the extratextual commentary that appeared in the 1803 edition of his novel, that is not provable. Second, the existence of numerous commentaries indicates that the novel was not completely selfexplanatory. Third, the absence of critical anxiety over the structure, theme, or interpretation of the novel in the premodern period shows that these were not problems for interpreters steeped in traditional fiction commentary. The 1736 preface claimed that the Rulin waishi surpassed the "four masterworks" of the Ming novel in excellence. The conception of "excellence" was heavily influenced by commentary editions of those novels. But what proof is there that the novel itself was influenced by them? Wu Jingzi's debt to literary-language sources is well recognized and read-

12 See the biography of Wu Jingzi by his friend Cheng Jinfang, RL WSYJZL 12-13. All later notices of a SO-chapter version are based on it. From the context and Cheng Jinfang's handling of the issue of the number of chapters or juan in Wu Jingzi's other works, it is pretty clear that 50 is just a round number (Chen Meilin, "Guanyu Rulin waishi," p. 282). 13 This claim is made in Jin He's postface and nowhere else. Many scholars have attacked his general accuracy. His claim is based on his access to privileged information as a relative by marriage of Wu Jingzi, but he wrote his preface more than a century after the latter's death. H Wu Zuxiang (p. 31) was probably the first to claim that extensive sections of the text outside chap. 56 were not by Wu Jingzi. For an ambitious attempt to argue that six chapters of the present text are not by Wu Jingzi, see Zhang Peiheng, "Rulin waishi yuanmao"; and idem, "Rulin waishi yuanshu." 1s The exception, of course, is chap. 56 and Jin He. Zhang Wenhu claimed that he originally had doubts about that chapter, and Jin He's postface proved its inauthenticity for him. Most premodern commentators praised the chapter, and their problems with it tended to be restricted to the inclusion of particular names on the list of posthumous degrees (youbang).

318

FOUR SOLUTIONS

ily evident from even the most cursory perusal of the collections of source materials on the novel (e.g., He Zehan; RLWSYJZL). His debt to vernacular literature is less known. Wu Jingzi's interest in drama is easy to establish from the part that actors play in his novel and from what we know of his life in Nanjing (Lu Decai, "Xiaoshuo," esp. pp. 280-81). Besides numerous explicit references to dramatic works, there are also echoes of the plots of certain plays. 16 As for novels and short stories, no character in the Rulin waishi reads any, nor are any explicitly mentioned. However, some of the stuffmaterial in literary-language sources for parts of the novel also exists invernacular renditions, 17 and it seems likely that they were the proximate sources for material in the novel. For instance, the discomfiture of Qu Xianfu by his wife, Miss Lu, has many points of similarity to tales about SuShi's sister and her husband. These stories exist in both literary- and vernacular-language versions (Tan Zhengbi, Sanyan Liangpai ziliao, pp. 436-41), but the most famous is story number 11 in Feng Menglong's Xingshi hengyan, "Su Xiaomei sannan xinlang" (Miss Su thrice stumps her newlywed husband). 18 There is an echo of the title of this story in the first half of the title couplet for chapter 11 in the novel, "Lu Xiaojie zhiyi nan xinlang" (Miss Lu stumps her newlywed husband with examination essay questions). There is also an incident in the novel for which scholars have only found a vernacularlanguage source (RLWSYJZL 181-82). Among novels, the Rulin waishi is most indebted to the Shuihu zhuan. However, scholars have often remarked Wu Jingzi's parodic use of Liu Bei's three visits to Zhuge L!ang's country dwelling (chap. 37 of the Sanguo yanyi) in the three visits by the Lou brothers to Yang Zhizhong's house. Although similar stories are legion, certain common details seem to indicate that the Sanguo yanyi was the prime source. The clearest evidence of the influence of traditional fiction commentary on the Rulin waishi is the structural imitation of the Jin Shengtan commen-

16

See, e.g., the similarity between Pinniang's dream (chap. 53) and the popular "Chimeng" (Dream of the madwoman). Zhang Wenhu referred to "Chimeng" as the blueprint (lanben) for this dream (RL WSHPB 53.717, ic). 17 An example is the story of how a scorpion bite prevented Wu Yubi (1392-1469) from memorializing the throne, something that happens to Zhuang Shaoguang in the Rulin waishi (chap. 35). There are not only plot similarities between the literary accounts and the novel but also verbal echoes. One treatment of Wu Yubi's story appears in the prologue to the third story in Xihu erji. The number of verbal similarities, however, seems to be greater between the literary-language sources and the novel than between this short story and the novel (RLWSYJZL 184-87). 18 Patrick Hanan (Chinese Short Story, p. 243) classifies this story as "late" (1550s-1620s) and indicates it is an adaptation of an earlier vernacular version found in an incomplete work that printed vernacular stories and literary tales together on the same page known as Xiaoshuo chuanqi (Stories and tales).

Latent Commentary: The "Rulin waishi"

319

tary edition of the Shuihu zhuan, particularly in the conception of the prologue chapter. Both novels begin with the quotation of poetry designed to establish a certain level of detachment in the reader toward the temptations described in the rest of the novel. Although the prologue in Rulin waishi comprises chapter 1 rather than prefacing it, as in Jin Shengtan's Shuihu zhuan, Wu Jingzi's opening chapter refers to itself twice (RLWSHPB 1.1, 16) by the term Jin Shengtan used to name his separate prologue (xiezi). We have previously noted that both prologues are separated from the bulk of the novel by a lack of temporal continuity and continuing characters, and that both end with similar assurances to the reader that what was just read is but a prologue, to be followed shortly by the story proper (see Chapter 10 above). At the beginning of the Shuihu zhuan an imperial official out of hubris insists that the stone stele imprisoning 108 baleful star spirits be removed. When this happens, "a black vapor went straight up into the sky and separated into more than a hundred flashes of light [baishi dao jinguang] that took off in all directions." 19 In the Rulin waishi, shortly after the news that a new examination system has been instituted that Wang Mian feels will cause scholars to forget the traditional virtues appropriate to writing, practice, service, and retirement (wen xing chu chu), he notices that the Guansuo constellation has encroached on that of the star of literature (Wenchang). Wang Mian and his companion see in the heavens above "more than a hundred small stars [baishige xiaoxing], all falling away to the southeastern corner of the sky" (RLWSHPB 1.15). The incarnation of the star spirits is never described directly in either novel. In the Shuihu zhuan, however, we are reminded from time to time of the supernatural origins of the heroes. 20 In the Rulin waishi, Yu Yude is presented as the incarnation of the god of literature (RL WSHPB 36.490). Elsewhere, the idea that the main characters are incarnations of star spirits tends to be treated ironicallyY

19 SHQZ 1.9 (SHZHPB P.49). In chap. 56 of the Rulin waishi, Shan Yangyan explains that the disorders in the empire are related to scholars frustrated by the examination system who after death become baleful spirits. Huang Xiaotian (Rulin waishi, 56.509, ic) quipped that they must be similar to the demons that came out of the black vapor in the Shuihu zhuan. 20 E.g., after Lu Zhishen becomes his disciple, the abbot of Mount Wutai tells him that he is a star spirit (tianxing); see SHQZ 4.64 (SHZHPB 3.104). 21 E.g., before his son-in-law's success in the examinations, Butcher Hu declares that those who pass the higher examinations are incarnations of the god of literature (Wenchang xing). When his son-in-law, Fan Jin, has a fit of insanity upon hearing he has won the juren degree and the neighbors succeed in persuading Hu to hit Fan Jin to bring him back to his senses, the hand he uses to strike Fan Jin remains palm up and he cannot turn it over. Butcher Hu then says to himself, "It's true that you shouldn't hit the star of the god of literature in heaven. Now the gods are paying me back" (RLWSHPB 3.41, 45-46).

320

FOUR SOLUTIONS

A point of similarity between Wu Jingzi and Jin Shengtan is their downplaying of supernatural elements. 22 Jin Shengtan's undermining of the supernatural aspects of the Shuihu zhuan is perhaps best seen as part of his campaign to ironize the portrait of Song Jiang in the novel. The Rulin waishi contains an incident in which corpses walk around (RL WSHPB 35.482-83), and prognostications made in dreams (2.30, 7.106) and by fortunetellers (7.109, 8.117-18) come true. However, just as in the Jin Shengtan commentary, these events are carefully undercut by the author through their manner of presentation and interpretation. 23 Wang Mian is portrayed as being able to predict the future, and in this respect he resembles the "seer" Chen Tuan in the Shuihu zhuan, who received Jin Shengtan's approval. The concept of the ability of the perceptive to predict the future is not negated in the Rulin waishi. As was also rumored to have been the case with Jin Shengtan, Wang Mian at one point makes his living telling fortunes (RL WSHPB 1.11). The similarity between Wu Jingzi's and Jin Shengtan's approaches to these matters can be seen by comparing the Rulin waishi to another novel deeply influenced by the Jin Shengtan commentary on the Shuihu zhuan: Chen Chen's Shuihu houzhuan. Chen Chen deployed the whole array of supernatural manifestations used in the Shuihu zhuan, from heavenly tablets falling from the sky to revelations in dreams and other predictions, to justify the enterprise founded by his heroes and to give shape to his narrative. Wu Jingzi used some of th; same type of material, but treated it ironically or

22 Wu Jingzi's reputation as a rationalist and a foe of superstition is overblown. This is part of a campaign to justify interest in the Rulin waishi by attempting to prove the progressive nature of the author's thought. Most of the papers written for the 200th anniversary of Wu Jingzi's death in Rulin waishi yanjiu lunji participate in this, and there are echoes of it in Paul Ropp's book on the novel. 23 The episode of the walking corpses is "naturalized" by having its witness reflect to himself that his surprise and fear are merely a function of his lack of experience and shallow learning (35.482-83). The dream prognosticating the future success of Wang Hui and Xun Mei in the same examinations is ironized by another, clearly made-up, dream recounted by Wang Hui to cover up his plagiarism (2.28-29). The recounting of the dream itself is instrumental in turning its prophecy into reality, as suspicion that Zhou Jin was responsible for the story of the dream in order to get more money out of Xun Mei's father leads to his dismissal as village teacher and sets off the chain of events necessary for the fulfillment of the dream. The most famous example of fortunetelling in the novel, Chen Li's "prediction" of Wang Hui's future, is similarly undercut by having the prognostication written in the form of a ci poem by the spirit of someone who died centuries before the invention of that verse form, an irony pointed out in the earliest commentary to the novel (RLWSHPB 7.112, cc 2; S. Lin, "Chapter Comments," p. 262). A "rational" explanation of how Chen Li could predict the future is given by a character in the novel, who says, "Coming events cast their shadows before. A fortuneteller is sensitive to these almost imperceptible signs. It has nothing to do with spirits or ghosts" (RL WSHPB 10.145; trans. based on H. Yang and G. Yang, The Scholars, 10.115).

Latent Commentary: The "Rulin waishi"

321

turned it to other purposes, which I believe is the same process wrought by Jin Shengtan in his editorial and commentarial work on the Shuihu zhuan. In both the Shuihu zhuan and the Rulin waishi, the characters who lead the reader into the text bear the given name "Jin" (to enter). 24 In the Shuihu zhuan, we follow Wang fin out of the capital in his flight from oppression until he meets Shi fin, whom he takes as a disciple and who is the first of the 108 heroes to appear in the volume. Jin Shengtan placed great stress on these details. In the Rulin waishi, the first figure to make his way up the examination ladder is Zhou fin. Not long after, he takes on a disciple, Fan fin. In both novels, the disciples end up causing their mothers to die, 25 and their masters are both portrayed as very filial men. Wang Jin and Wang Mian share the same surname, and both disappear from their respective novels never to return. 26 Wu Jingzi seems to have divided the figure of Wang Jin as model figure and introductory device between Wang Mian and ZhouJin. Both novels deal with vast casts of characters organized around central figures (see Chapter 7 above). Modern critics are disappointed that Wu Jingzi did not make his central character, Du Shaoqing, into a "real main character" (zhenzheng zhujiao; Chen Ruheng, p. 150), but some of the peculiarities of his place in the novel can be explained by reference to Jin Shengtan's comments about the central figure in the Shuihu zhuan, Song Jiang. For instance, Jin Shengtan praised the delayed appearance of the latter (SHZHPB 16, df9; John Wang, "How to Read," p. 133), which is set up by the negative examples of Hong Xin and Wang Lun. More and more critics now see the main function of the various mostly negative characters who appear in the first part of the Rulin waishi as preparing the way by contrast for Du Shaoqing's entrance (see, e.g., PanJunzhao). The Rulin waishi would have been considered a poor novel if it had not used the techniques for foreshadowing and prefiguring people, 27 places, 28 and 2 ~ See Chapter 10 above. Plaks (Four Masterworks, p. 309n91) cites the role of He Jin in the Sanguo yanyi and speaks of using characters with the personal name Jin to begin novels as a "novelistic joke." 25 Shi Jin causes his mother to die of apoplexy (SHZHPB 1.68), and Fan Jin's mother faints into a fatal illness because of the sudden prosperity brought on by her son's success in the examinations (RL WSHPB 3.50, 4.54). Although that does not seem to say anything about Fan Jin's filiality, his conduct during the mourning period for her leaves little doubt. 26 Wang Jin's dropping out of the text is praised in item 6 of the "Fafan" of the Yuan Wuyai edition of the Shuihu zhuan (SHZHPB 31) and by Jin Shengtan (SHZHPB 1.54, cc). 27 An example of advance insertion of a named character can be seen in Niu Buyi's brief appearance (RL WSHPB 7.102) long before his later return to play a far more important role as one of the Lou brothers' guests and a participant in the gathering at Yingdou Lake. His appearance is so brief that the fact of it is not noted in the index of characters for the novel (Zhu Yixuan, "Rulin waishi renwu biao," p. 47). Upon the reappearance of Niu Buyi in chap. 10, Huang Xiaotian (Rulin waishi, p. 10.95, ic) remarked that since his name was inserted earlier, his appearance here is not unprepared for. For readers without benefit of Huang Xiaotian's

322

FOUR SOLUTIONS

events29 after all the propagandizing for them by fiction critics such as Jin Shengtan. The same is true for the way that the Rulin waishi takes pains to recall characters and events mentioned earlier in the noveP 0 and to retroactively supplement earlier accounts of incidents, 31 techniques stressed as vital to the organic unity of full-length fiction by traditional fiction commentators. Jin Shengtan drew attention to what he considered skillful and daring repetitions of the same plot sequences, and the Rulin waishi does not lack examples of this. 32 Critics such as Jin Shengtan showed a preference for the alternation of material and style in narratives, sometimes just for variety, but also because the universe was conceived to be structured more by such alternation than by linear development. In the Rulin waishi, episodes that treat infatuation with success, fame, riches, or rank alternate with each other, and the varying balance between the attention given these elements colors the different sections of the novel. 33 The narrative in the Rulin waishi, like that in the Shuihu zhuan, is punctuated by meetings of like-minded people. Descriptions of these meetings include lists of the participants and some fuss over precedence in seating. The similarity of the longest lists of characters in these two novels, the youbang ("posthumous roster") in the last chapter of the Rulin waishi and the list of heroes on the stone tablet in the Shuihu zhuan, has long been recognized.

commentary or who missed Niu Buyi's earlier appearance in the text, Wu Jingzi has Qu Xianfu explain to the Lou brothers how he happens to know Niu Buyi's name and has Niu Buyi refer in conversation back to the episode of the joke about Su Shi, in which he first appeared before the reader (RLWSHPB 10.143-44). 28 An example of the advance insertion of a place is the sight of Hong Hanxian's future place of burial by Ma Chunshang (RL WSHPB 14.204) before he even meets Han (15.216). 29 Even trivial events are anticipated. For instance, the spilling of the contents of Kuang Chaoren's peddler's pack by a competitor (17.236) is prepared for by an earlier enumeration of its contents (16.229). 30 E.g., the gathering at Yingdou Lake in chap. 12 is recalled when Niu Pulang finds a poem mentioning it in Niu Buyi's collected poems (RLWSHPB 21.288) and by means of the quarrel between Ding Y anzhi and Chen Siruan over the question of whether any poetry was written on that occasion (54.727-29). 31 For instance, we find out later (15.216) that there was nothing mysterious about Han Hongxian's knowing Ma Chunshang's name at their first meeting (14.210) because he had overheard Ma's conversation with the bookseller about his collection of essays. 32 Parallel sequences are primarily used in the Rutin waishi to fine-tune characterization by stimulating comparison of the figures involved. An example is the contrast between Du Shaoqing's and Zhuang Shaoguang's explanations to their wives of their decision whether to participate in the special examinations in the capital (RL WSHPB 34.463, 471-72). In general, Rutin waishi's use of parallel or repetitive incidents is far more subtle than the Shuihu zhuan's. 33 For a succinct interpretation of the novel in these terms, see Liu Xianxin, Xiaoshuo

cailun, RL WSYJZL 292-94.

Latent Commentary: The «Rulin waishi"

323

Moreover, like Jin Shengtan's version of the Shuihu zhuan, the Rulin waishi ends with a poem in which the implied author speaks directly to the reader. When Wu Jingzi was writing the Rulin waishi, with its attention to the description of the public relations of men and women rather than private and domestic life, the most suitable structural model was the Shuihu zhuan. 34 The Shuihu zhuan had been praised for its structure from the earliest mentions of it. Furthermore, the shift from plot to characterization already apparent in Jin Shengtan's edition and interpretation of the Shuihu zhuan is very evident in the Rulin waishi. Another major influence on the Rulin waishi was the Shiji. As well acquainted as he was with the historical Sima Qian, 35 in his fictional writing Wu Jingzi was probably influenced most directly by the Sima Qian elevated to "patron saint" of narrative in fiction criticism, particularly that of Jin Shengtan. 36 The relationship between the Rulin waishi and the Shuihu zhuan is similar, in certain respects, to that between Joyce's Ulysses and Homer's Odyssey. T. S. Eliot thought that Joyce was primarily manipulating parallels between the ancient and modern world as a way of structuring his novel: "It is simply a way of controlling, of ordering, of giving a shape and a significance to the immense panorama of futility and anarchy which is contemporary history."37 The Rulin waishi and Ulysses are alike in their ambition to present a broad and in-depth portrait of a society, including a wide variety of types of people, although the one describes events that take place in a span of over 100 years and the other deals with the events of a single day. Both authors were confronted with the problem of how to organize their material. Wolf-

3" The imprint of the Shuihu zhuan on the Rutin waishi was quite evident to Huang Xiaotian: "The organization of the chapters [pianfo] is modeled [fong] on that of the Shuihu zhuan .... This book [the Rutin waishi] also has a biography [zhuan] for each character" (Huang Xiaotian, Rutin waishi, p. 16, comment after the Xianzhai laoren preface). The reference to each character having a zhuan is based on Jin Shengtan's comments on the Shuihu zhuan (see Chapter 5 above). Huang Xiaotian also believed that individual sections, mostly in chaps. 38-39, were purposeful imitations of sections in the Shuihu zhuan (e.g., 39.361, ic). 35 Ping Buqing, in his Xiawai junxie, mentioned that Wu Jingzi wrote an unfinished work entitled Shi Han jiyi (Recorded questions regarding the Shiji and the Hanshu; RL WSYJZL 249). 36 A reference to history in general and to the Shiji in particular can be seen in the title of the novel, which shares two of the same characters with the title of the collective biography of the Confucian scholars ("Rulin liezhuan") that makes up chap. 121 of the Shiji. It is quite easy to produce a convergent reading of the Rutin waishi and the "Rulin liezhuan," since both are concerned with the distortions and manipulations of learning that arise after the intervention of the state. 37 T. S. Eliot, "'Ulysses,' Order, and Myth," in Mark Schorer, Josephine Miles, and Gordon McKenzie, eds., Criticism: The Foundations of Modem judgment (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1948), p. 270.

324

FOUR SOLUTIONS

gang Iser characterized the relationship between Joyce's Ulysses and Homer's Odyssey this way: If the novel is to uncover a new dimension of human existence, this can only present itself to the conscious mind of the reader against the background made recognizable by allusions and references which will thus provide a sufficient amount of familiarity. But the "uncreated conscience," which the novel is to formulate, cannot be the return of something already known-in other words, it must not coincide purely and simply with the Homeric parallel. Harry Levin has rightly pointed out that the links betweenJoyce and Homer are parallels "that never meet." While the Homeric allusions incorporate into the text a familiar literary repertoire, the parallels alluded to seem rather to diverge than to converge. Here we have the conditions for a rich interplay that goes far beyond the lines of interpretation laid down by the analogy or permanence theories. Indeed there arises a certain tension out of the very fact that there is no clearly formulated connection between the archaic past and the everyday present, so that the reader himself is left to motivate the parallelism indicated as it were by filling the gaps between the lines. This process only comes to the fore if one in fact abandons the idea of the parallels and instead takes the modern world and the Homeric world as figure and ground-the background acting as a sort of fixed vantage point from which one can discern the chaotic movements of the present. 38

The Disappearing Narrator and the Reader-Commentator In the Rulin waishi, the marks of the narrator's presence drop away to a minimum. 39 One job of.the traditional narrator as oral storyteller was to guide the reader over transitions between the three modes of commentary, description, and presentation (see Chapter 9 above) and through changes of narrative focus, temporal or spatial. For many reasons to be discussed below, transitions and transfers of this kind are minimized in the Rulin waishi so as to require less narratorial intervention than is the case in other traditional Chinese fiction. The way narrative focus changes in the Rulin waishi is in accord, to a perhaps unprecedented extent, with the "billiard ball" technique (see Chapter 9 above). Narrative momentum is transferred from one setting to the next by physically moving a character associated with the first setting to the second. This technique is prominent in the chapters of Jin Shengtan's edition of the Shuihu zhuan. For partisans of the Rulin waishi, this was the approved way

38 Iser, pp. 182-83. Lipking (p. 631) speaks of the "continuous implicit marginal gloss of Ulysses" and comments on how "economical it would be to print the Odyssey as a running marginal gloss to Joyce's Ulysses." 39 This quality of the novel is surely behind He Manzi's remark (p. 36) that if you removed the chapter couplets and chapter-ending formula, the result would be indistinguishable from "a modern novel."

Latent Commentary: The "Rutin waishi"

325

to handle narrative transitions; traditional storyteller intrusions to manage such narrative transitions were labeled "vulgar shtick" (sutao; Huang Xiaotian, Rutin waishi, 38.358, ic). Another tactic for minimizing narratorial intrusion in the Rutin waishi is to remove almost all barriers to the progressive and steady flow of narrative time. In the Shuihu zhuan, the narrator sometimes stops to tie up loose threads in the old strand of the narrative before jumping to a new one, necessitating that he deal with the same block of time twice (e.g., SHZHPB 51.95051). Although Jin Shengtan did not go so far as to remove instances of the use of flashback in the Shuihu zhuan (already comparatively rare in the first half of that novel), he did change storyteller rhetoric that emphasized the change in temporal setting (e.g., SHQZ 49.805, 818n4). In the Rutin waishi, characters are almost never introduced directly by the narrator; instead they are introduced to the reader through the words of other characters or else just appear in the narration, to be introduced by themselves or other fictional characters. These techniques for unobtrusively introducing characters were praised by Jin Shengtan (e.g., SHZHPB 8.193-94, ic), and they are faithfully followed in the Rutin waishi. The few exceptions are clearly done for rhetorical effect, as in the remarks made by the narrator upon Zhuang Shaoguang's first appearance or the provision of a formal biography for Yu Yude in chapter 36. Like many other novels, the Rutin waishi begins and ends with segments in which the implied author is close to the surface. But in sharp contrast to the examples discussed in the preceding chapter, the narrator in Rutin waishi is stingy with his comments. There is an almost complete absence of rhetorical questions to the reader or self-references either to himself or his text (the only example of the latter occurs in a rare instance of the former, RL WSHPB 55.749). Narratorial intrusions of the informative kind are rare (Chen Meilin, "Lun Rutin waishi," p. 251, lists only nine examples), and narratorial quotation of poetry or set phrases that comment on the action or individual characters are completely absent, except in the chapter-ending couplets. It is also rare for the narrator in the Rutin waishi to make direct comments about fictional characters, and these tend to refer to characters whose moral probity is not in much doubt. The narrator does not inform the reader when characters are lying, 40 nor does he explicitly indicate the true

40 The most often cited example is how Senior Licentiate Yan's claim that he never cheated anyone is exploded by a servant's report that the owner of a pig appropriated by Yan has come to complain about it (RLWSHPB 4.61-62). In the 1803 edition, the commentator wrote, "This incident makes the reader understand [Senior Licentiate Yan's character] without wasting too many words. If a clumsy hand had done it, he would surely have said, 'Gentle reader pay heed: in reality Senior Licentiate Y an was such-and-such a person.' The writing then would be com-

326

FOUR SOLUTIONS

identity of characters who reappear under different or false names. 41 In Zbigniew Slupski's words, "The reader is not guided by the narrator; he is simply presented with motifs and scenes which he must interpret for himself" (p. 125). In Chapter 10 we noted a trend to put remarks ordinarily made by a narrator into the mouths of fictional characters and indicated that Jin Shengtan did precisely this in his revision of the text of the Shuihu zhuan. This device is used heavily in the Rulin waishi, but the reader must pay careful attention to whether the remarks are reliable or whether the exact opposite meaning is implied, as in the case of Academician Gao's criticism of Du Shaoqing (RLWSHPB 34.466-67). It has been proposed that the suppression of explicit judgment of characters by the narrator in the Rulin waishi in favor of implicit judgment, either unexpressed or put into the mouths of represented characters, is related to the influence of drama, which has no narrator (Lu Decai, "Xiaoshuo," pp. 280-81). A far more likely source, however, is the popular conception in fiction criticism and elsewhere of how Sima Qian subtly blended commentary and narration in his Shiji (see Chapter 5 above). The Woxian caotang commentator praised this aspect of the Rulin waishi, saying that the novel contains examples of "directly narrating the incident without expressing one's judgment so as to let the truth of the matter reveal itself." 42 The evaluation of the fictional characters by the reader is the main focus of the Rulin waishi, and accounts of readers' using the book as a primer in how to evaluate real pt!tsons (see the anecdote about Shen Baozhen mentioned in Chapter 7 above) are not entirely exaggerations. In the Rulin waishi the author set up both negative and positive criteria by which to judge the moral worth of the characters. The negative criteria are related to the degree to which characters in the novel are obsessed by "success, fame, riches, and rank." Nonattachment is also expressed positively through adherence to authorially sanctioned values such as filiality. In neither instance, however, are the actions taken by characters so much at stake as the attitudes and motives informing these actions. It is easy to be confused about Wu Jingzi's attitudes toward actions in the novel if they are examined one by one and out of context, but this becomes

pletely without flavor" (RL WSHPB 4.66, cc 5; trans. based on S. Lin, "Chapter Comments," p. 258). 41 For example, the reader is given only very subtle clues that there is something odd about Zhang Junmin (he is actually a character encountered earlier under the name of "Iron-arm" Zhang) when he shows up in the narrative (RLWSHPB 31.426). He is not unmasked until chap. 37. 42 RL WSHPB 4.67, cc 7; trans. based on S. Lin, "Chapter Comments," p. 258. Similar language appears in RLWSHPB 7.112, cc 3; S. Lin, "Chapter Comments," p. 263.

Latent Commentary: The "Rulin waishi"

327

less of a problem if due attention is paid both to their context and to the handling of similar actions elsewhere in the novel. This of course is precisely one of the major functions of extratextual commentary-to make the reader read individual sections of the novel with the novel as a whole in mind. It is important to remember that the motives behind the characters' actions are more important than the actual acts, since the same act performed for different motives must be judged differently. Yu Yude is presented as the character in the body of the novel most perfectly embodying Wu Jingzi's ideals. Some criticize him for not distinguishing between good and bad characters in his relations with others (e.g., Chen Meilin, Wu ]ingzi yanjiu, p. 208), and he is specifically criticized for supposedly encouraging others to commit evil through overly lenient treatment of "malefactors" (e.g., Wu Zuxiang, p. 25). This ignores the transformative power attributed to such lenient treatment, and to good examples in general, in the novel. Yu Yude's actions are never presented as proceeding from any personal or ulterior motive and are shown to have a powerful influence on their beneficiaries. The Chinese word for virtue (de) also embraces the idea of power through the exertion of influence on others. Yu Yude's particular acts are also backed up by similar acts by positive characters elsewhere in the novel. Just as the traditional intratextual mode of commentary is largely nonexistent in the Rulin waishi, so too is the traditional mode of description almost completely absent. In this novel there is nothing exceeding the length of a couplet that can be assigned to that mode. Just as the decline in the commentarial mode was bound up with the growth of fiction commentary, so too was the decline of the mode of description (see Chapter 9 above). In the Rulin waishi, some of the functions of the old descriptive mode are achieved through the integration of description into the mode of presentation. The novel also makes use of a new descriptive mode modeled largely on classical prose that does not require formal markers to indicate its boundaries. In the Rulin waishi, the lyricism of the description and the reaction (or nonreaction) of the characters to the settings described are used to make comments on the characters who encounter the scenes. For instance, during Ma Chunshang's famous tour of West Lake, the author carefully plays off the natural beauty of the area against Ma Chunshang's rather limited field of vision, which lingers over food but avoids the sight of other temptations (such as women). Moved, finally, by the view from the top of Mount Wu, all he can do is quote two lines from one of the Four Books (RLWSHPB 14.202-7). The suppression of both the commentarial and the descriptive modes in the Rulin waishi has some interesting consequences. The severe curtailment of the commentary mode forces the reader to participate actively in the cru-

328

FOUR SOLUTIONS

cial process of judging and evaluating the moral worth of the characters. The transformation of the descriptive mode into a less intrusive form subordinated to characterization serves to draw the reader more deeply into the text and is an aid to evaluating certain characters in the novel. Although the predominance of the mode of presentation gives the illusion that the story is being directly perceived in an unmediated form by the reader, thus shortening the distance between himself and the world of the characters, the author could count on the fact that experienced readers of traditional fiction (with commentary attached) had internalized more complex reading strategies. These strategies would provoke them to compose a running commentary on the action in their heads as they read, leading them to maintain an appropriate "critical distance" between themselves and events witnessed by them in the text. For the traditional Chinese reader trained to look for the author in the text, the apparent disappearance of the author in the Rulin waishi was just an incitement to look harder, which in turn encouraged the turning of the reader's attention to ever subtler details in the text. The author was only apparently absent; the game of communing with the author was made more challenging but by no means impossible. The author is only pretending to be silent behind his pretense of showing rather than telling. Manipulation of the reader in an endeavor to ensure that he will accept the author's point of view is still at the heart of even a novel such as the Rulin waishi. The only difference is the subtlety of the process and the fiction that the author is doing nothing of the kind.'-' 43 Similar developments seem to have taken place in the West with the acceptance of Henry James's fiction and the critics' conception of it as emphasizing showing over telling. In the fiction of Flaubert and Joyce, there is a withdrawal of the author's personality from the surface of the text. Flaubert and Joyce spoke of this in the same terms used by the deists to describe God as a watchmaker. That fact, however, has not lessened interest in the personal lives of these authors.

14

Everything All at Once: The "Honglou meng"

The Honglou meng is easily the most complex novel produced in premodern China. It is understandable, then, that it should also present the most complex solution to the challenge of extratextual commentary. To a greater or lesser extent, all the solutions examined in the three previous chapters were employed in the composition of this one novel. The Honglou meng is perhaps the novel in premodern China with the most fluid boundaries between text and commentary. This is partly a matter of historical accident. For almost half a century, the Honglou meng circulated in manuscript form in copies of varying length and completeness. Comments on the manuscripts reveal that the work was in a constant state of authorial revision up until Cao Xueqin's death, and there is evidence of tinkering with the text even before Cheng Weiyuan (ca. 1745-ca. 1819) and Gao E (1763-1816) edited and published it. The Honglou meng was, in many respects, a collaborative project. The manuscripts in circulation were, at least originally, prepared for a select audience of the author's family and friends, with all the editorial abandon that tends to go with such a mode of production. The commentary seems to have been an ad hoc affair done as a labor of love, but with little attention to systematization or developed argument. Only toward the end of the manuscript period were the original text and commentary subjected to anything that could be called editing. 1 Before the printing of the novel in 1791-92, 2 sections of the text might appear as extratextual commentary in one manuscript and as part of the main text in another. The relationship between the Honglou meng and previous fiction and fiction commentary is quite complex, but it can perhaps best be described 1 I refer to the "Y ouzheng" filiation of manuscripts, one of which (with a preface by Qi Liaosheng) was later photo reprinted with changes by the Y ouzheng shuju of Shanghai after the turn of this century (Rolston, How to Read, pp. 469-71). 2 Gao E and Cheng W eiyuan decided not to include the commentary in their editions, primarily because of the bulk and expense; see their joint foreword (yinyan), HLMJ 32 (Stone, 4: 387-88, item iv).

330

FOUR SOLUTIONS

as innovation within the tradition. The novel itself contains extensive explicit criticism of its competition. Its debts to earlier fiction, though not openly acknowledged in the text, are often mentioned in the commentary on the early manuscript versions. The novel that most influenced the Honglou meng is the fin Ping Mei, and the relationship between these two novels has been an important topic of discussion since the Honglou meng's appearance. Although some scholars have tried to deny a connection between the two so as to insulate the latter from the bad reputation of the former (see, e.g., Fu Zengxiang), the fin Ping Mei's strong influence is almost universally accepted, even if we still await the definitive treatment of this topic. 3 A comment in the Zhiyan zhai commentary praises Cao Xueqin for "profoundly appropriating the mysterious secrets of the fin Ping Mei." 4 Scholars also agree that it was the Zhang Zhupo edition of the fin Ping Mei with which Cao Xueqin was most familiar. 5 The ties between the Honglou meng and the Shuihu zhuan 6 are far weaker than those between the Honglou meng and the fin Ping Mei, but fiction commentators were fond of stressing the Honglou meng's similarities to that novel as well. Comments in the Zhiyan zhai commentary indicate a perceived relationship between the two novels in terms of both incident and literary technique/ and Jin Shengtan's name is mentioned twice (see Chapter 1 above). Later commentators could be quite detailed in their attempts to map the later novel to the earlier one. 8 In most of these comments we 3

The most complete attempt to date is Scott. ZYZ 13.238, jiaxu me. The comment refers to details in Qin Keqing's funeral modeled on Li Ping'r's funeral in the]in Ping Mei. See [Chen] Xizhong, "'Shende]in Ping hu'ao.'" 5 See Chapter 2 above on the acquaintance between Zhang Zhupo's father and the grandfather and great-grandfather of Cao Xueqin, and the connections between the Cao family and Li Yu and his favorite commentator, Du Jun. See Wang Rumei, "Zhang Zhupo"; and idem, "'Zhang pingben,'" on Zhang Zhupo's influence on Cao Xueqin. 6 One of these is that both revolve around stone tablets with writing on them {see Jing Wang, Story ofStone). 7 A comment signed Zhiyan compares Jia Yun and Ni Er of the Honglou meng with Yang Zhi and Niu Erin chap. 12 of the Shuihu zhuan (ZYZ 24.441, gengchen me). Another comment identifies the use of restricted point of view as a "Shuihu literary technique" (ZYZ 26.479, jiaxu ic). On how Jin Shengtan revised sections of the Shuihu zhuan so that they would reflect the point of view of characters more clearly, see Rolston," 'Point of View,'" pp. 130-31. 8 As in this anonymous comment probably dating from the late Qing period: "Some say that the description of characters in the Honglou meng is developed out of [tuotai] the Shuihu zhuan. This is correct. Baochai is like Song Jiang; Xiren [Aroma] and Xifeng are like Wu Yong; Daiyu and Qingwen [Skybright] are like Chao Gai; Tanchun is like Lin Chong; Xiangyun is like Lu Zhishen; and Xue Pan is like Li Kui. When Chao Gai is hit by the arrow [in chap. 60], only Song Jiang cries; when Qingwen is driven out [in chap. 77], only Xiren cries. Li Kui curses Song Jiang; Xue Pan curses Baoyu and Nanny Li curses Xiren. These are all instances of following a model [yiyang hulu]. As for the chapter 'A Mischievous Lad Causes an Uproar in the Classroom' [chap. 9 in the Honglou meng] it uses the three attacks on Darning fu [chaps. f

Everything All at Once

331

can readily see the influence of Jin Shengtan's interpretation of the Shuihu zhuan. 9 Modern scholars have also become interested in the possible influence of the Shuihu zhuan and Jin Shengtan on the Honglou meng. An unpublished paper on this topic was given by Guo Yingde at a conference on the Shuihu zhuan in China. At the same conference, Zhang Guoguang said that the Honglou meng was both an extension of Jin Shengtan's "tragic" interpretation of the Xixiang ji and an implementation of his theory of the novel ("Disanjie," p. 136). He has also claimed that the prologue (yuanqi) of the Honglou meng is an imitation (mofang) of Jin Shengtan's "Shi Nai'an" preface to the Shuihu zhuan (Zhang Guoguang, "Jin Shengtan," p. 41). Zhang Guoguang is largely responsible for the "rehabilitation" of Jin Shengtan since Mao Zedong's death, and his partisanship is often clearly in evidence, but on this point his ideas have been seconded by other scholars. 10

Auto-commentary and Collaboration Some scholars (e.g., Li, p. 230) think that parts of the earliest commentary to the Honglou meng, the so-called Zhiyan zhai commentary (for bibliographical description, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 456-71), were written by Cao Xueqin himself. These are either comments copied into the text proper on some of the manuscript copies, 11 which is a rather frequent occurrence (ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 52-55) or comments in dialogue with other comments but from the author's point of view (ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 98-100). But the total number of comments we can reasonably ascribe to Cao Xueqin is rather

63-66 in the Shuihu zhuan] as a blueprint [lanben]; Jingui's [Cassia's] attempt at seducing Xue Ke [in chap. 91 in the Honglou meng] takes its lead from the [seductive] wiles of the two Pans [Pan Jinlian and Pan Qiaoyun]" (Kong Lingjing, pp. 204-5). For a similar comment linking the characterization in the two novels that shows the influence of Jin Shengtan's commentary, see the comment by an anonymous female written after chap. 34 on a nineteenth-century edition of the Honglou meng (Hu Wenbin, p. 148), quoted in Chapter 8 above. 9 This is clearly implied in one section of Zhang Xinzhi's commentary where he first put the artistry of the novel on a par with that of the Shiji and then continued: "But actually, it is nothing but a matter of [the author's] being able to really read [shandu] the Shuihu zhuan. By saying this, I don't mean to belittle the Honglou meng, but I don't dare forget the Shuihu zhuan" (JYY 2/12b [94], cc). 10 E.g., Lin Wenshan, "Nuozhan," p. 103. For published speculations about Jin Shengtan's influence on Cao Xueqin, see Hegel, Novel, p. 227; Lu Decai, Xiaoshuo yishu lun, p. 153; Mu Hui, pp. 6, 37, 120, 196; Liu Hui, "Cong cihua ben," p. 38; Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 300, 542; Chen Hong, Lilun shi, p. 100; Lin Wenshan, "Lunfin Xixiang"; and Ji Zhiyue, p. 291. 11 See Yu Pingbo, pp. 23-24; and Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 538-39.

332

FOUR SOLUTIONS

modest. We can be certain, however, that there was much collaboration between Cao Xueqin and the early commentators. 12 The commentary in the early manuscripts is known as the Zhiyan zhai commentary after the studio name of the most important contributor, Zhiyan zhai (Red Inkstone Studio). The commentary contains remarks signed with as many as ten different names, excluding those of later owners and readers of the manuscript copies. The bulk of the signed comments are by Zhiyan zhai or Jihu sou, and we assume this to be true of the more numerous unsigned comments. The identity of the commentators and their exact relationship to Cao Xueqin remains in doubt (there is even some controversy over whether Zhiyan zhai and Jihu sou are two persons). When these manuscripts were rediscovered and studied, Hu Shi and Yu Pingbo (1900-1991) both argued that Zhiyan zhai and Cao Xueqin were the same person (see Hu Shi, "Ba Qianlong gengchen ben," p. 121; and Feng Shujian, p. 69). Yu's argument was that no one else could have known the mind of the author but the author. 13 Most scholars think that Zhiyan zhai was a close relative of the same generation as the author, 14 and Jihu sou probably belonged to the previous generation. 15 Some of the Zhiyan zhai commentators experienced events that were models for episodes in the novel, 16 and they often assert that characters are based on people they know. A comment dated 1762 says, "It is a pity that it is not prudent to note down all the [real] names of the characters throughout the book" ~ZYZ 24.443, gengchen me). At one point, one of the commentators got mad at the author because of how Baoyu is described: "When I first saw this [part], I couldn't help getting mad at him, because I thought that the author was describing past events in my youth. But I thought, he is also writing a portrait of himself [as he once was], it's not only me [that he has in mind]" (ZYZ 17.293, gengchen ic). The Zhiyan zhai commentators are often criticized for forgetting the difference between life and art, but they sometimes managed to keep them 12 See ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 96-103. The commentators' collaboration included making copies of the text and indicating gaps to be filled by the author. For an example of the latter, see ZYZ 75.669, gengchen pre-chapter comment. 13 Feng Shujian, p. 69. Interestingly enough, Feng Shujian's first argument against the identity of Cao Xueqin and Zhiyan zhai is that no self-respecting author would flatter himself so. Feng also discusses Zhou Ruchang's theory that Zhiyan zhai was a woman who ended up marrying Cao Xueqin. 1 ~ E.g., Chen Hong, Lilun shi, p. 253, where evidence that Zhiyan zhai refers to the author as if they were of the same generation is cited. 15 The main evidence is Jihu sou's forcing Cao Xueqin to change the text of his novel against his will (see below). 16 Many comments mention how long ago the events they think are the models for incidents in the novel occurred, e.g., ZYZ 13.23l,jiaxu andgengchen me.

Everything All at Once

333

apart. For instance, the following unsigned comment shows both a rather simplistic idea of the relationship between reality and fiction and a more complex notion of that between fiction and reader: Moreover, this [incident] is also something that I personally saw and heard in the old days and is a ready-made piece of writing experienced by the author. It is not made up by him and is thus vastly different from the stereotyped movements from separation to union and from sorrow to joy [lihe beihuan] that you find in ordinary fiction. I think that if the sons of great families now fallen on hard days read this, then although the exact events might be different, the underlying emotions and principles [qingli] should match up perfectly with what is in their hearts. 17

One of the commentators (Zhiyan zhai?) made a longish comment in which he both saw himself as one of the models for Baoyu and recognized that Baoyu the fictional construct was something new. He claimed that although Baoyu was perfectly recognizable to himself and his co-commentators, his like had never before been seen, either in the world or in previous fiction or drama. 18 Zhiyan zhai, after noting several of the dreams that occur in the Honglou meng and its title, declared both he as commentator and his readers are in a dream (ZYZ 48.601, gengchen ic). However, the Zhiyan zhai commentators tended to stress the plausibility of the events described in the novel. When this is not possible, they attribute unlikely events to a secret design of the author. For instance, when lictors from Hades appear to take away Qin Zhong's soul, a comment reads: In the entire Shitou ji, all the events and talk are both reasonable and plausible and of the kind that seem positively necessary. Interspersed among them are also occasional absurd and noncanonical events such as this. This is the author purposefully using playful strokes. It is done to break the reader's infatuation with appearances and for satiric effect, unlike other books that tell ghost tales in all seriousness. 19

The Zhiyan zhai commentary was written over a long period of time. The years mentioned in the commentary proper stretch from 1754 to 1771.

17 ZYZ 77.679, gengchen ic. There are also comments that exhort the reader not to be concerned over whether incidents described in the text happened (e.g., ZYZ 7.155, jiaxu ic) or claim that a reader who believes in the reality of sections of the novel has been fooled by the author (e.g., ZYZ 5.115,jiaxu ic). 18 ZYZ 19.337-38, jimao ic. Chen Xizhong ("Shuo 'zhen you shi shi' ") has argued that the recurrent statement in the commentary, zhen you shi shi (there really was such a thing), does not really mean that the incident happened to the commentator or the author but that it is something that generally occurs to people. 19 ZYZ 16.288, gengchen me. On the other hand, another comment on this passage says that only with the inclusion of this kind of material can we really talk about the text being "fiction" (xiaoshuo; jiaxu ic).

334

FOUR SOLUTIONS

Since 1754 was the year Zhiyan zhai started his second round of comments, the commentary began even before that date. According to one scholar, Zhiyan zhai read and commented on the novel five times, and Jihu sou did so six times (Zhao Jinming, pp. 297-98). Zhiyan zhai described his reading and commenting as an unsystematic business, and cared neither about contradicting his earlier comments nor starting at the beginning and working all the way through each time (ZYZ 2.37,jiaxu me, partial trans. in Rolston, "Formal Aspects," p. 68); this is probably also true of Jihu sou. 20 Although there are occasional critical remarks, as well as disagreement among the commentators and between earlier and later remarks of the same commentator, the commentary as a whole is supportive of the entire creative project. Besides pointing out marvelous techniques used by the author (Zhou Zhenfu, "Zhiyan zhai"), the Zhiyan zhai commentary exhibits three overriding ideas with reference to the particular nature of the Honglou meng and its author. One, the stress on innovation in the Honglou meng (see Chen Qianyu, pp. 139-46; and Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, pp. 52531), is probably related to the influence of Li Yu, who is mentioned in the commentary (see Chapter 2 above). The other two are related to ideas about fiction stressed by Jin Shengtan, who is also mentioned in the commentary (see Chapter 1 above). They are (1) the notion that the author is a crafty and cunning person (Cao Yusheng, p. 73, lists over 30 comments of this type) and (2) that the surface of the text (zhengmian) is a dangerous illusion divorced from the real meaning underneath (/anmian). 21 Zhiyan zhai and Jihu sou participated not only in the writing of the commentary but also in the copying, editing, and composition of the text. 22 Zhiyan zhai's name appears not only in the title of many of the manuscript 20 Sometimes the dates given in the commentary allow us to know at what approximate speed they worked. For instance, from spring to the sixth or seventh month of 1762, Jihu sou made a copy of the novel, upon which he began to comment in the eighth month. In the first nine days of that month, he commented on a total of nine chapters (ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 100101). 21 In chap. 12 a magic mirror is given to Jia Rui with strict instructions not to look at the "front side," which shows a beckoning Wang Xifeng. The reverse side shows a grinning skull. Jia Rui prefers the front and dies after repeated ejaculation. This mirror appears as a metaphor for the novel in the commentary (e.g., ZYZ 8.183, jiaxu me; 12.227-28, three interlineal comments in the jimao, gengchen, Wang(u, and Youzheng copies; 43.588, gengchen ic). 22 The collective commentary on Nuxian waishi, mentioned in Chapter 3 above, has been proposed as a model for the Zhiyan zhai commentary (Wang Xianpei and Zhou Weimin, p. 363). However, with the exception of Liu Tingji, none of the commentators to that novel seem to have had much input on its composition. On the comments in the Zhiyan zhai commentary that indicate the novel was the product of a collaboration between the author and the commentators, see Feng Shujian, pp. 71-72. Scholars have also argued that certain passages in the text of the novel were added by Zhiyan zhai (see, e.g., Mei Jie).

Everything All at Once

335

versions and in the signed comments but also in the text proper of the jiaxu manuscript. 23 Although their collaboration in the production of the Honglou meng raises the importance of the Zhiyan zhai commentators vis-a-vis any understanding of that novel, some scholars have referred to their work as "interference" (ganyu). 24 It is clear that the commentators were occasionally successful in making Cao Xueqin change his novel against his will. The clearest instance is the death of Qin Keqing at her own hands after she is found out in an incestuous relationship with her father-in-law, Jia Zhen. In one comment, Jihu sou says that he ordered (ming) the author to change the treatment of Qin Keqing's death, eliminating a total of four to five pages of text. 25

Blurred Boundaries The Honglou meng has not one but many prologues, which peel away one by one as the reader makes his way deeper into the text. The commentators do not agree where the prologues end and the main text begins. The Zhiyan zhai commentators took the main text to start as early as chapter 3 or as late as chapter 12 (ZYZ 3.58, jiaxu ic; 12.229, gengchen post-chapter comment), and Zhang Xinzhi thought that it does not start until chapter 17. 26 There is no separate section before chapter 1 labeled the prologue in the manuscript versions. In the second printed edition (1792), the narrator refers to the section of the text before the introduction of Zhen Shiyin as the "yuanqi" (section explaining the origin of the text; Cao Xueqin and Gao E, Honglou meng [1964], 1.4), a term used for the prologue in other novels, and as the xiezi in the Zhiyan zhai commentary (ZYZ 1.12, jiaxu me; 12.229, gengchen post-chapter comment; 54.619, gengchen pre-chapter comment). The jiaxu manuscript has a fanli. Before a closing poem, its five items discuss the novel's various names, geographical setting, focus on the women's quarters, lack of political content, and origin, respectively (ZYZ 23 See the photoreprint of this copy, Zhiyan zhai, l!Sb (p. 9b in the continuous pagination) and the translation in Stone, 1: 51. 24 See Liu Shangsheng, who claims the main points of contention were the title for the book, the evaluation of Xue Baochai and Xiren, and the honor of the family. Liu says that if Cao Xueqin had completely given in to the commentators, the result would not have been worth reading. 25 The number of pages missing is mentioned in an unsigned marginal comment in red ink, Zhiyan zhai, 13/llb (137b), and the reasons for the excision are recorded in a comment on the same page, at the end of the chapter, in red ink. Although this comment is unsigned, the commentator refers to himself in the same way as Jihu sou does in signed comments. 26 JYY 17I 44a (259), cc. He compared this chapter to the prologue of a chuanqi play, and chap. 19 to the beginning of the play proper.

336

FOUR SOLUTIONS

"Fanli" 1-2; 1.1-4). The last item appears (with textual variants) as the prechapter comments to chapter 1 in some manuscripts and as the opening of the text proper in others, as well as in the printed versions of the novel 27 (ZYZ 1.1-4). This item must originally have been a pre-chapter comment, since it explicates the two halves of the title couplet for chapter 1, which are quoted in abbreviated form when it appears as pre-chapter comments or part of the text proper and more completely in the fanli version. The almost complete absence of comments when it appears in the text proper shows that it was not taken as part of the text by the Zhiyan zhai commentators.28 In the process of explicating the title couplet, "the author's" (zuozhe) decision not to let his failures or his poverty keep him from transmitting the story of the girls he knew when he was young is quoted extensively. This is the kind of material we would expect to find in a preface, and it is understandable that the author of the fanli elevated its referent to the novel as a whole rather than just the first chapter (the fanli even inserts the word shu [book] in the opening sentence, ZYZ 1.1). This quotation of the author on his motives for composition is also functionally equivalent to the practice influenced by fiction commentary of beginning novels with lyric passages in which the implied author is near the surface (see Chapter 10 above). It is unlikely, however, that the poem that concludes the fanli is by Cao Xueqin (Cai Yijiang, "Jiaxu ben," pp. 284-86, lists five reasons), eveq if it does sum up the novel and its composition rather concisely. The section of the text referred to as the xiezi in the Zhiyan zhai commentary and as the yuanqi in the printed editions describes how the divine stone is created, comes to long for the mortal world, and is incarnated through the agency of a monk and a Daoist. After his stay in the world, he returns to his point of origin, where a monk named Vanitas (Kongkong daoren) reads the narrative of the stone's story inscribed on the stone. After his initial doubts are overcome by the stone's arguments, Vanitas makes a copy of the text to publish. Although it is not clear how it gets into his hands, we are also told that Cao Xueqin pored over the text for ten years, edited it five times, added a table of contents, divided the text into chapters, gave it a title, and inscribed a quatrain on it, which is quoted (HLM 1.6-7). The reader might expect to then read from Vanitas's or Cao Xueqin's copy, but when the story starts again, the narrator claims to quote directly from the text on the stone (HLM 1.7). 27 The pre-chapter comments to chap. 2 also appear as part of the text proper in many manuscript versions (see ZYZ 2.34-36; and HLM 2.34-35nl). 28 The three comments attached to it are all from the Wangfu manuscript, not all of whose comments are from Zhiyan zhai's circle and time period (ZYZ 1.2nn1-2 and 3nl).

Everything All at Once

337

Vanitas returns in chapter 120 of the printed versions to find a whole new section added to the text inscribed on the stone after the concluding poem he had read earlier (HLM 120.1646; Stone, 5: 374). The description makes it clear that something more than the few pages describing Vanitas's initial criticism of the story and the stone's defense of it (HLM 1.4-6) is meant. A whole story of incarnation and illumination equivalent to the entire novel is implied. It also turns out that Vanitas has not as yet done anything with the copy of the text he made, but he now makes a new copy and takes it to Cao Xueqin, who speaks of it in ways reminiscent of the author's quoted remarks at the beginning of the novel and agrees to see to its publication. 29 The chapter ends with a poem ascribed to "a later writer" that echoes the quatrain inscribed on the manuscript and attributed directly to Cao Xueqin in chapter 1 (HLM 120.1646-48). The insistence by the author of chapter 120 (probably not Cao Xueqin) on two readings by Vanitas of two rather different texts destroys the otherwise perfect circularity between the beginning and ending of the 120chapter version of the novel. Possibly the author of chapter 120 was the person who rounded off Cao Xueqin's unfinished manuscript (Gao E is the usual suspect), and he wanted to highlight his contribution by making a veiled reference to his sequel. 30 Whatever the case, just as the prologue functions as a preface, so the ending is similar to a postface. 31 The division into chapters is one of the defining characteristics of the vernacular novel in China. In the Honglou meng, however, it is presented in the prologue as an afterthought, a claim backed up by the way chapter divisions are handled in the early manuscripts. For instance, chapters 17-18 are not divided in the gengchen manuscript copy of the novel. The dividing line between the two chapters is indicated not in the main text but in a comment in the Zhiyan zhai commentary (HLM 17-18.258-59n1). This seems more natural in the Honglou meng than in other novels because Cao Xueqin's chapters do not open and close in regular and formulaic ways. Before the Honglou meng, it was standard for chapters to begin with an opening poem and to end with a formula inviting the reader to listen to or read the next chapter to find out how the story develops. The closing formula was commonly prefaced by a poem or a couplet in the commentarial

29 Jia Yucun, who insists that the novel is literally true, is contrasted to Cao Xueqin, who stresses its fictionality. 30 When the narrator introduces the final poem and explains its relationship to the one explicitly attributed to Cao Xueqin in chap. 1, he refers to the author of the earlier poem (and the novel) in the third-person, thus creating a certain distance between the author of chap. 120 and the author of the rest of the novel (HLM 120.1648). 31 The last section of chap. 120 was described as the "author's postface" (ziba) by Yao Xie, who also stressed its connection to the opening section of the novel (JYY 120/54b [1550], cc).

338

FOUR SOLUTIONS

mode. In the early manuscripts of the Honglou meng, there are examples of chapters that begin with a poem, but none of the manuscripts has more than five of these and all the examples occur before chapter 18 (Liu Mengxi, "Lun Honglou meng"). There is agreement that at least one of them, the one before chapter 2, is by Cao Xueqin himself. 32 Doubts about the others arise because some appear in the pre-chapter comments in some manuscripts; the question is whether they were written by Cao Xueqin or the commentators. 33 Whether or not Cao Xueqin intended to write chapter-opening poems for all the chapters, the commentators show a fondness for quoting poems in their pre-chapter comments that can be seen as an attempt to fill the "lyric vacuum" left by the absence of chapter-opening poems (ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 71-72). This tendency reached its greatest development in the manuscripts related to the Y ouzheng shuju edition. One poem that appears in them is signed Lisong xuan (pseud.), 34 and it has been argued that he was responsible for all the new commentary in the Youzheng filiation of manuscripts before the Y ongzheng edition itself (Zheng Qingshan, Lisong xuan ben). The draft of the novel that seems to have been edited by Gao E in preparation for the printed editions eliminated all the chapter-opening poems, for which it was praised by Yang Jizhen (ca. 1832-ca. 1892), one of the later owners of that draft (ZYZ 765, tepi to chap. 83, dated 1889). It was not until the printed editions of the Honglou meng that the chapter endings were regularized into a simple form consisting of the raising of a question or a mystery. and an invitation to listen (ting) or read (kan) the next chapter for the explanation. 35 This regularity is very different from the state of affairs in the manuscripts. In the gengchen manuscript, one of the most complete, the chapters end in fourteen different ways, ranging from a mere petering out of the narrative to couplets prefaced by a brief introductory phrase (zhengshi, "truly it is") to the introductory phrase without anything following it to simple formulas to formulas preceded by couplets introduced by introductory phrases (Liu Mengxi, "Lun Honglou meng," p. 49). Twelve chapters have couplets or poems at the end, and as with the chapter-opening poems, they are concentrated in the early chapters of the

32

A comment in the Zhiyan zhai commentary to this poem attributes it to Cao Xueqin

(ZYZ 2.36, "special comment" [tepi] written underneath the poem in thejiaxu ms.). 33 On difficulties in identifying these poems as commentary or main text, see ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 55-56. Liu Mengxi ("Lun Honglou meng") thinks that most of the eight poems he identifies as chapter-opening poems are by commentators, whereas Cai Yijiang ("Zhiben," pp. 376-97) thinks many of them are by the author. 34 ZYZ 41.571. Lisong xuan is not thought to have been a member of the original circle of commentators on the novel. 35 Sometimes no verb equivalent to ting or kan appears. Of these three possibilities, ting is the clear favorite, followed by kan, and then no verb.

Everything All at Once

339

novel. 36 Although many prefer the anarchy of the manuscripts over the tired regularity of the printed editions (e.g., Liu Mengxi, "Lun Honglou meng," p. 56), there is less experimentation in the manuscripts than in, for example, Li Yu's multi-chapter stories (see Chapter 12 above). There are some rather extensive segments in even the first 80 chapters of the Honglou meng (i.e., those almost universally accepted as Cao Xueqin's) that do not fit well into their larger contexts. For instance, the story of Jia Rui and the "mirror for the romantic" in chapters 11-12 is inserted into the story of Qin Keqing's illness and requires almost a year to complete, whereas the interval from the first notice of Qin Keqing's illness to her death is much shorter than that. A comment in the Zhiyan zhai commentary indicates that Cao Xueqin once wrote a book called "A Precious Mirror for Romantics" (Fengyue baojian). 37 The most common explanation for the odd nature of these passages (which include the story of the two You sisters in chaps. 64-69) is that they were salvaged from the earlier work and incorporated without much revision into the later one (e.g., Stone 3: 62023, "Appendix III"). None of the manuscript versions of the Honglou meng, with the exception of the so-called Gao E draft, goes beyond chapter 80, even though there are many specific references to chapters later than that in the Zhiyan zhai commentary. Chapter 80 is an ordinary chapter little different from the preceding one. Even though only a rather dense reader would not realize that she is not long for this world, the tragic heroine of the novel, Lin Daiyu, is still alive in chapter 80. This state of affairs was intolerable for most readers, and their itch for a more conventional ending was scratched, to some extent, by the appearance of a 120-chapter "complete" (quan) printed version in 1791-92 and a host of sequels shortly thereafter. However, there was no lack of critics who argued that the 80-chapter version of the manuscripts was complete in itself. Not surprisingly, the best-known examples appear in prefaces to 80-chapter versions of the novel, 38 but modern scholars also hold this opinion (e.g., Wang Yishan, p. 247). We can attribute some of this willingness to put up with an obviously unfinished 36 Liu Mengxi, "Lun Honglou meng," p. 49. He is not convinced that all are by Cao Xueqin. For a list of the chapter-ending couplets or poems, see ZYZ 766-69. 37 ZYZ 1.12, jiaxu me. The comment also indicates that Cao Xueqin's younger brother wrote "small prefaces" for it. It is commonly held that the "small prefaces" were chapter comments and that some of them are preserved as chapter comments in the manuscripts of the Honglou meng. 38 See the Qi Liaosheng preface found in the Y ouzheng editions and the Mengjue zhuren (pseud.) preface to the jiachen ms., Lunzhu xuan 1: 492, 514. Zhang Xinzhi, who wrote a commentary to a 120-chapter version, argued that the novel reaches its climax (yuanman) in chap. 82 and everything after that is merely a matter of tying up loose ends (liaoshi); see JYY 82/12b (1082), cc.

340

FOUR SOLUTIONS

work to the interest in "unfinished conclusions" (bu jie zhi jie) in fiction criticism that started with Jin Shengtan's truncated edition of the Shuihu

zhuan.

Who (or What) Is the Narrator? Cao Xueqin's narrator neither intrudes himself constantly, as in the Ernu yingxiong zhuan, nor disappears so as to get out of the reader's way, as in the Rulin waishi. Instead, he intrudes often enough to make sure we do not forget him and stays hidden enough to allow the reader to think for himself. The narrator in the Honglou meng is also neither a thinly disguised projection of the author as in Li Yu's fiction nor the "pseudo-oral" narrator sharply differentiated from the author found in the Ernu ying-

xiong zhuan. After the quotation of the author's words and the explanation of the chapter titles for chapter 1, the narrator in the gengchen manuscript begins with a question and a promise: "Dear Readers [kanguan], what, may you ask, is the origin of this book [shu]? Speaking of the source [of it], although it might come close to the absurd, careful reflection will show that deep down there is something to it. Allow me [zaixia] to explicate [zhuming] its history, so as to cause the reader [yuezhe] to be clear about it and without doubts" (HLM 1.1). In this very short passage, the narrator has addressed the reader (rather than the "listener" of the "oral storyteller simulacrum"), 39 acknowledged that we •re reading a book rather than listening to a story, referred to himself, and stolen a march on his critics by admitting his story is rather fantastic. 40 In the section up to the quotation of the poem attributed to Cao Xueqin, the narrator tells us how the text was copied from the stone by Vanitas and edited by Cao Xueqin, but, as already noted, the narrator starts the story again by quoting from the text on the stone rather than the one edited by Cao Xueqin. Or is the narrator of the prologue not the same narrator as the rest of the novel? Another unsettling thing is that the reader is never told how the text recounting the stone's incarnation was inscribed on him. 41 The narrator, on 39

Whereas kanguan can refer to the audience of the oral storyteller, yuezhe can only refer to readers of texts. Interestingly enough, the "Gao E draft" has the more ambiguous kanzhe (readers/ onlookers), and the printed editions have no corresponding term at all. For a collation of a total of ten early manuscripts together with the earliest printed version, see Feng Qiyong, p. 1.6. 40 Elsewhere the Zhiyan zhai commentary refers to this last technique as zizhan dibu (occupying the high ground oneself). See below. 41 Two statements that the stone was the one who recorded or copied brief snatches of material quoted by the narrator are treated below.

Everything All at Once

341

the other hand (if we can keep him and the stone separate for a bit), on two occasions describes his actions as "writing" (xie) 42 rather than "narrating" (shu, shuo, etc.), terms he uses elsewhere on numerous occasions. In the first of those two instances, the narrator presents himself in a quandary over which of the myriad narrative leads (touxu) 43 he should now take up in order to make the account marvelous (miao), when his problem is solved by the appearance, supposedly on their own, of a particular family distantly connected to the Jias (HLM 6.94). In the second, the narrator talks of how a choice made by himself saved paper and ink (zhimo; HLM 17-18.245). After the beginning of the novel, the humble term of self-reference zaixia does not reappear, and the narrator switches to calling himself chunwu (stupid thing). 44 This is a link to the stone himself, who is called chunwu by the monk and the Daoist (HLM 1.5) and by himself (Zhiyan zhai, 1/4b). This narrator who calls himself chunwu is identified as the stone in comments in the Zhiyan zhai commentary. 45 At one point the narrator remembers his former existence in the Great Fable Mountains (Dahuang shan), 46 but there are two instances in which he quotes material he says was originally recorded by the stone, thus making a distinction between himself

~ 2 HLM 5.69, 6.94. The Zhiyan zhai commentary (ZYZ 5.110,jiaxu ic) remarks on the unusual nature of this conception of the relationship between the narrator and the text. ~ 3 A technical term in fiction criticism (e.g., JPMZLHB 26, 37, df 13 and 48; Roy, "Chin P'ing Mei," pp. 206, 229). 44 HLM 17-18.246; Feng Qiyong, p. 6.289 (jiaxu and Youzheng versions only). The passage in chaps. 17-18 is copied as extratextual commentary in the jiachen ms., but chunwu is changed to zuozhe (author; ZYZ 18.319, ic). The passage in chap. 6 refers explicitly to what we are reading as a book. This change in self-reference from zaixia to chunwu might be a sign that the narrator of the first pages and that of the bulk of the novel are not the same, a possibility already broached above. ~ 5 ZYZ 6.135, jiaxu me; 18.320, jimao, gengchen, Wangfu, and Youzheng ic. Baoyu is called chunwu by a variety of people, including the narrator (HLM 28.385), Jia Zheng (HLM 1718.232), and Daiyu (HLM 3.49). Although the commentators tend to call Baoyu "Brother Jade" (Yuxiong) rather than "Brother Stone" (Shixiong), Baoyu is interestingly linked to both stone and jade. For instance, in a dream shared by Daiyu and Baoyu, Baoyu tries to find his heart to show her but comes up with nothing (HLM 82.1184, 83.1191-92); in a later dream, a man throws a stone into his chest (HLM 98.1262). In chap. 113, someone thinking about Daiyu's and Baoyu's fates says that they would be better off as insensate plants or stones (HLM 113.1558). ~ 6 HLM 17-18.245. The term of self-reference is ziji, which can also refer to someone else in the third-person if there is a clear antecedent, which is not the case here. In the jiachen ms., this passage is written as extratextual commentary and prefaced by the words, "This is the selfnarration of the stone" (the text actually has Shitou ji rather than shitou, but this makes less sense; ZYZ 18.319, ic). The Zhiyan zhai commentary identifies the narrator here as the stone and praises the technique of letting him speak directly (ZYZ 18.319, gengchen me, andjimao, gengchen, Wangfu, and Youzheng ic).

342

FOUR SOLUTIONS

and the stone. 47 When the narrator remembers his former existence as a stone in the Great Fable Mountains, however, he presents himself as the author of the story and not as a mere recorder, and explains why he decided not to follow fictional conventions in the handling of one section of the narrative (HLM 17-18.245). Material in the commentarial mode in the Honglou meng can be divided into two types. One consists of functional and unobtrusive remarks, such as passages directly addressed to the reader concerning new characters or incidents mentioned for the first time. These passages are often prefixed by the words yuanlai (it so happened that ... ), and in contradistinction to the practice in the Rulin waishi, they sometimes come several to a page. In these passages the narrator is not personalized. The remarks in the other category are much more idiosyncratic and obtrusive. Many of these are close to extratextual commentary in tenor and content; this explains why so many of them were copied as extratextual commentary in some of the extant versions (e.g., HLM 8.124). Occasionally these passages refer to themselves as annotation (zhu), an idea seconded by some commentators in the Zhiyan zhai commentary (e.g., ZYZ 3.60 and 3.64, jiaxu ic). The commentarial and personalized side of the narrator tends to be reduced in the printed versions of the Honglou meng, which delete many of the more obtrusive narratorial intrusions or present them more conventionally. For instance, in the manuscript version the passage in which the narrator explains why Baoyu's couplets and titles for the places in the garden have been retain-ed is prefaced by the word an favored by extratextual commentators (HLM 17-18.245). This is replaced in the second (and most popular) printed edition with "kanguan tingshuo" (gentle reader, listen to me), used so frequently in the commentarial mode of earlier texts (Cao Xueqin and Gao E, Honglou meng [1964], 18.203). In the manuscript version the narrator presents the problem as a seeming contradiction be-

~ 7 HLM 4.59 (see also 4.68n6); 8.124. In the first instance, the stone is said to have "made a copy" of the "Mandarin's Life-Preserver," and the narrator claims to be quoting the text as copied onto the stone. In the second instance, the narrator says that "obstinate stone" (wanshi) "recorded" (jixia) both its "transformed shape" (huanxiang; i.e., the shape it took when it appeared in the mortal world in Baoyu's mouth at the latter's birth) and the text written on it by the monk (mentioned but not quoted in chap. 1; HLM 1.3). Why the stone would need to make a copy of text that was inscribed on itself by the monk is not explained. That text, incidentally, is reproduced in the pages of the novel in enlarged characters. The fact and purpose of their enlargement (supposedly done out of concern for our eyesight) is carefully explained by the narrator, who does not want to be criticized for implying that Baoyu could have been born with something big enough to hold the enlarged characters on it in his mouth, referring to such an outsize object as a "stupid and large thing" (chun da zhi wu). The Zhiyan zhai commentary also describes the stone as a recorder (ji) and distinguishes it from the narrator (shuzhe; ZYZ 21.395, gengchen ic).

Everything All at Once

343

tween the high status of the Jia clan and their use of the writings of an adolescent as if they were nouveau riche satisfied to use the most vulgar of couplets to decorate their premises. How could this, he says, be something that the Ning and Rong branches of the Jia clan described in The Story of the Stone would be willing to do, and is this not a case of "great internal contradiction"? (HLM 17-18.246). The printed version is greatly pared down and omits the mention of the title of the novel and the statement about internal contradiction (Cao Xueqin and Gao E, Honglou meng [1964], 18.203). Although the narrator usually presents himself as omniscient, he declines to give the reader some details out of "delicacy" (HLM 5.91, Baoyu's initiation to sexual intercourse) or professed ignorance. 48 The narrator also refuses to guess events when the jade was not in a position to witness them (e.g., HLM 15.207), which is related to the conceit, hinted at more than carried out, that the jade/stone is the conduit through which the world of the novel reaches us. 49 Although many of the more idiosyncratic comments by the narrator in the Honglou meng that reflect on narration and the composition of the text are quite interesting and experimental, their number is, again, not great. The preferred technique for introducing commentary into this novel is to put it into the mouths of the fictional characters, a technique explicitly recognized in the Zhiyan zhai commentary in connection with the evaluation of characters by the narrator (see Chapter 9 above). The Honglou meng, like many later literati novels, is a "talky" affair, and its characters are given to making comments on all manner of topics, from how to write poetry (see Cai Yijiang, Honglou meng, pp. 398-416) or paint paintings 50 to the difference between yin and yang. 51 The characters often use technical terms from the particular aesthetic field they happen to be discussing, but these terms sometimes also appear in fiction criticism. 52

~ 8 Such as the family background of the two young boys who are the "cause" of the schoolroom brawl (HLM 9.138). The narrator says that he does not know which branch of the Jia family they are related to and has not found out by investigation (kao) their real names. ~ 9 See Rolston, "'Point of View,'" pp. 133-34. ZYZ, "Daolun," pp. 119-20, speculates that the movement from "objective narrative from the stone's point of view" to narration subjectively centered on Baoyu to a synthesis of the two is due to the different origins of sections of the text. 50 Xichun is commissioned to make a painting of Prospect Garden, and the project becomes a matter of general discussion when she requests a leave of absence from the poetry club to devote herself to painting. 51 Shi Xiangyun and her maid talk about how some things that are usually yin can be yang in relation to other things (HLM 31.438-39). 52 E.g., in discussions of poetry: beimian fufen (whitening the background to bring out the foreground; HLM. 38.529); and painting: fenzhu fenbin (distinguish the host and guest; HLM

344

FOUR SOLUTIONS

Characters in the novel are also shown making oral or written commentaries on the works of others, 53 and some are praised for their skill at commentary (HLM 42.584). The traditional narrator in Chinese vernacular fiction is the one who gives the reader hints or even detailed comments on how the story will develop. That function in the Honglou meng is taken out of the narrator's hands and dispersed into those of a large number of characters, including "supernatural" beings supposedly knowledgeable about the future (such as the scabby monk, the lame Daoist, and the Fairy of Disenchantment) and ordinary characters occasionally able to read portents missed by those around them, as in Jia Zheng's reaction to the ominous riddles composed by the young cousins in chapter 22 (HLM 22.312-15). The exact relevance of these statements to the novel and its characters is always a matter of interpretation, and their import is easily missed by the first-time reader. If that reader is lucky enough to read one of the manuscripts with commentary, however, he could not overlook this aspect of the text, since the elucidation of these hints is one of the prime activities of the Zhiyan zhai commentators. Extratextual commentators made it their business to show how their work stood out in comparison to other works of vernacular literature. In the Honglou meng, these concerns are incorporated into the text itself, but instead of letting the narrator do the talking, the comments are allotted to individual characters. 54 Sometimes these comments are presented seriously; sometimes they are und~rcut by irony because we know that the speaker is deluded or misinformed. 55 Vernacular literature, and drama in particular, is a constant topic of conversation in the Jia household, which is wealthy enough to have dramatic performances whenever its inhabitants like, but whose internal security is not strong enough to keep "disrespectable" reading matter out (Rolston, 42.586). For examples of these terms in fiction criticism, see SHZHPB 20-21, df 56 (John Wang, "How to Read," p. 142); and SGYYHPB 9-10, df9 (Roy, "Romance," pp. 166-70). 53 E.g., Zhen Shiyin composes an oral commentary on the lame Daoist's "Won-Done Song" ("Haoliao ge"; HLM 1.18-19), and Baoyu writes marginal comments on his copy of the Zhuang Zi (HLM 21.292-93). According to a comment written by Daiyu on Baoyu's comment, Baoyu's Zhuang Zi was the Zhuang Zi yin, a commentary edition by Lin Yunming (fl. seventeenth century) which contains a prefatory section influenced by the dufa essays in fiction commentaries and even published separately as a dufa (Rolston, "Formal Aspects," pp. 72-73n71). 54 The stone's comments on the text inscribed on himself in chapter 1 present a bit of a problem since, as we have seen, it is possible to argue that in some respects the stone and the narrator are one and the same. 55 This is the case with Grandmother Jia's remarks on popular oral narrative and fiction (HLM 54.758-59). Her criticisms of them as stereotypical and implausible are in accord with similar remarks made by the stone in chap. 1, but she is deluded about how popular literature of this kind influences the members of her household.

Everything All at Once

345

"Oral Performing Literature," pp. 58-66). Although one scholar has spoken of Cao Xueqin as using fiction to write criticism on the Xixiang ji (Jiang Xingyu, "Cao Xueqin"), the play that along with Mudan ting figures most prominently in the novel, the most interesting passage is the stone's defense of his text to Vanitas in chapter 1. The stone's remarks are part of a general campaign in the early chapters to steal a march on potential critics of the novel by pre-emptively presenting their criticisms and then disposing of them as early as possible. The commentators in the Zhiyan zhai commentary call this technique zizhan dibu (occupying the high ground onesel~ or xianzhan dibu (first occupy the higher ground), 56 which they apply to both the narrator (ZYZ 1.4, jiaxu ic) and individual fictional characters (ZYZ 14.246, jiaxu and gengchen ic). Vanitas objects that the novel lacks dates and fails to treat affairs of state or high morality. The stone replies that the dating of popular fiction is nothing but a meaningless convention, and his story of the girls he once knew not only is a worthy diversion but may save readers some energy and hard knocks if they heed its lesson. The stone points out the flaws in three kinds of novels-historical fiction (yeshi), pornographic fiction ifengyue bimo), and scholar-beauty fiction (jiaren caizi)-that he insists his own text does not have (HLM 1.4-6). His words have the desired effect-Vanitas rereads the text and decides to publish it. The mode of description is used with restraint in the Honglou meng. Passages of parallel prose describe important people and sights, but they are seldom introduced by set formulas as in earlier fiction and consequently stick out less. 57 Exceptions are extended passages mixing the commentarial and descriptive modes introducing extraordinary persons seriously (e.g., the rhyme-prose when the Fairy of Disenchantment first appears; HLM 5.7374) or ironically (e.g., the two ci poems on Baoyu's first appearance; HLM 3.50) or filtered through the point of view of a particular character (e.g., Daiyu's and Baoyu's first good look at each other; HLM 3.49, 51). The reduction of the descriptive mode in the Honglou meng was intentional, according to the narrator and the Zhiyan zhai commentary. When Jia Yuanchun, as imperial concubine, pays a visit to her parents, the Jia household constructs an elaborate garden to serve as her "temporary palace." When she begins her tour of the garden, it is the night of the Lantern Festival toward the end of winter, but the Jias have gone to the trouble of

56 Note the similarities to the traditional term in European rhetoric "occupation," defined by the nineteenth-century rhetorician Fontanier in this way: "It consists in forestalling or rejecting in advance an objection which might be raised" {Todorov, p. 22). 57 See, e.g., the short passages in parallel prose describing Wang Xifeng, Baoyu, and Daiyu in chap. 3 (HLM 3.41, 49, 51).

346

FOUR SOLUTIONS

putting lanterns on the vegetation to simulate leaves and flowers (HLM 1718.245). As he begins to describe all this, the narrator says, At this time I remember back then when I [ziji] was in the Great Fable Mountains under Greensickness Peak and how desolate and lonely it was there! If the scabby monk and the lame Daoist had not carried me to this place, I would never have seen such a sight. I originally wanted to compose a "Rhyme-prose on the Lanterns in the Moonlight" ["Dengyue fu"] and "A Hymn to the Visitation of the Parents" ["Xingqin song"]58 in order to commemorate the events of today [iinri], but I was afraid that to do so would be to fall into the vulgar formulas [sutao] of other books [shu]. In my opinion [an], with a scene [iing] such as this, even if you composed a rhyme-prose [fu] or a set-piece [zan], you still could not completely describe the marvelousness of it. On the other hand, if one does not compose a rhyme-prose or a set-piece, its opulence and beauty can well be imagined by my honored readers [guanzhe zhugong]. Thus I have saved myself some effort, as well as paper and ink. But now I should get back to the story proper. 59

An unsigned comment in the Zhiyan zhai commentary is at pains to justify the rhyme-prose on the Fairy of Disenchantment, the longest single passage in the mode of description in the novel, and the two poems on Baoyu: According to the general principles [fanli] 60 of this book, there should be no idle writing [xianwen] such as set-pieces [zan] and rhyme-prose [fu]. Previously there were the two ci poems on Baoyu [HLM 3.50], and now there is this rhyme-prose. What is the explanation fop this? It is because these two persons are connected to the structure of the entire work [tongbu dagang], so one cannot but use this kind of formula [tao]. In the case of the ci poems earlier, the author had his own deep meaning [for including them]; therefore they are marvelous. As for this rhyme-prose, although it is not great, still it is something that cannot be done without. (ZYZ 5.117, jiaxu me and Y ouzheng filiation ic)

Comments in the Zhiyan zhai commentary also claim simple and integrated descriptions are just as good as one in rhyme-prose (e.g., ZYZ 3.81, jiaxu ic; 18.317,jimao andgengchen ic).

58 In the same chapter Yuanchun says that they should compose a "Xingqin song," and Jia Zheng offers up to her a "Guixing song" (Hymn on the visitation), but nothing comes of the first and the second is not quoted (HLM 17-18.250, 256). 59 HLM 17-18.245. The text is explicit only in the case of the second "I," all the others are merely implied, as is quite common in Chinese. This passage, which is part of the text proper of five of the early manuscripts, appears as an interlineal comment in the jiachen ms. That version has numerous textual variants, including "the set-formulas of fiction writers" [xiaoshuojia sutao] instead of the "set-formulas of other books" (ZYZ 18.319). 60 The "Fanli" to the jiaxu ms. contains nothing that corresponds to what is said here. The commentator probably has in mind an implied set of general principles for the novel.

Everything All at Once

347

Every Reader a Commentator In the beginning, when the novel circulated in manuscript within a small circle of friends, it was probably literally true that every reader of the Honglou meng was a commentator. In this early batch of commentators, we can add to those who signed their comments in the Zhiyan zhai commentary such people as the real author, Cao Xueqin; the "author" in the text, the stone; and the reader in the text, Vanitas. After the novel was published and the circle of readers widened, this high proportion of commentators among its readers continued. Some were content to scribble comments on their personal copies, some felt the need to publish them; some made their comments orally to their friends, some wrote sequels and imitations of the Honglou meng to contain them. In these sequels and imitations, we often find the fictional characters producing oral or written commentary on the Honglou meng (the Huayue hen and Hou Honglou meng have already been mentioned). The sheer bulk of extant commentary on this novel is enormous.61 So many readers have found a home in the Honglou meng because there is so much room there to inhabit, if for no other reason than its obviously unfinished state tempts readers to move in and start making repairs. Another reason is that although the narrator is not completely averse to occasionally telling the reader what to think about a particular character, this is generally done only with lesser and more one-dimensional characters. The narrator's direct comments on major characters such as Baoyu and Baochai tend to be ironic or ambiguous. 62 The reader is presented with at least two alternative readings for these characters, and although it is possible to work out fairly precisely the author's attitudes toward them by careful attention to detail and the state of fiction composition and criticism at the time the novel was written, there is more than enough in the novel for commentators to come up with diametrically opposite evaluations of sets of characters (see Chapter 8 above). The Honglou meng was recently described as set up to "deliberately leave the reader confused over the author's or authors' vision and purpose" (Minford and Hegel, p. 454). Traditional commentators admit the possibil-

61

For bibliographic descriptions of the major traditional commentaries and independent works on the Hong/au meng, see Rolston, How to Read, pp. 456-84. For information on other editions, sequels, independent works, redologists old and new, and a chronology of redology, see Feng Qiyong and Li Xifan, pp. 918-58, 968-77, 1088-156, 1169-245, and 1247-302. 62 The Zhiyan zhai commentators are very alive to this aspect of the novel (e.g., ZYZ 19.349, 355, jimao, gengchen, Wang(u, Youzheng ic). Baoyu, of course, is not everyone's cup of tea. In a survey of Peking University students, he was voted the most irritating (taoyan) literary character (Huo Songlin, pp. 1155-56).

348

FOUR SOLUTIONS

ity of confusion but stress the subtlety with which the author's message is conveyed to the active and persistent reader (e.g., ZYZ 16.283, gengchen me). The text itself does give some hints to the reader as to how to approach this task. One way this is done is to present images of readers in the text itself. The most important of these, excluding the stone and his unnarrated reading of his own text, is Vanitas, who progresses, with the stone's help, from a shallow initial reading to a second reading that literally transforms him into a different person. 63 Besides the stone's specific attempts to contextualize the story so that Vanitas will better be able to appreciate its unconventional qualities, which stress the importance of commentary, the reader is told emphatically that a single reading is not enough. Baoyu progresses in chapter 5 from a "bad reader" of the ledgers and song-suites outlining the fate of those he loves to a more competent one in chapter 116. This is another instance of re-reading, but it is also important that the Baoyu of chapter 116 is not as stuck in the here and now as the Baoyu of chapter 5. He is now better prepared to reach a more total vision of his place in the world and beyond. It is this all-embracing vision not bound by time that the Zhiyan zhai commentators sometimes chide each other for losing (e.g., ZYZ 14.245, gengchen me) and the text and its commentators continually push us toward. 63

Cf. "If you read the Lunyu, and the person you were before the reading and the person you are after the reading is tht same, then you haven't really read it" (Zhu Xi and Lii Zuqian, 3/lOb-lla, item 30 [W. Chan, Reflections, p. 100].

Reference Matter

Works Cited

The bibliography for this volume does not attempt to be comprehensive. I apologize that considerations of space have made it impossible to acknowledge all the scholarship by colleagues in China and the West that has enriched my understanding of traditional Chinese fiction criticism. All cited works are listed below, with the exception of titles peripheral to the subject matter of this book, for which full bibliographic information is given at the time of citation. In the text, Chinese and Japanese authors are always cited by their full name, and Western writers by surname only except in cases of possible ambiguity.

Chinese- and Japanese-Language Works Aina jushi :X.:*P:l@±. Doupeng xianhua £Lffi}jM~3. Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1984. Aso Isoji Mij~f:Ji~~- Edo bungaku to Shina bungaku ?IJ5)C~tx~~)C~. Tokyo: Yiiseito, 1974. Aying lffi]~. "Honglou meng shulu" ~~-~~~. Xiaoshuo sitan !J\~~1?]~~. pp. 73103. In idem, Xiaoshuo xiantan sizhong Jj\~~M~Imfm. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1985.

Bakin, T akizawa -~.~~. trans. Shinhen Suiko gaden $Jf~7j(i~:ilf$. Tokyo: ltefu honkan kokai, 1953. Ban Gu _m~. Hanshu ¥f~. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1962. Cai Yi ~fi, ed. Zhongguo gudian xiqu xuba huibian $~~~~8B}TW;t~;tl. Ji'nan: Qi Lu shushe, 1989. Cai Yijiang ~*?I. Honglou meng shi ci qu fu pinzhu ~~-~~~RJ8EMW-f~.1. Beijing: Beijing chuban she, 1979. - - . "Jiaxu ben Shitou ji 'Fanli' jiaoshi" Ef3FX::z!s:U"~Ji~cfLWtlt.X~. In idem, Lun Honglou mengyigao ~~~-~f~m. Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji, 1989, pp. 276-86. - - - . "Zhiben Shitou ji huiqian shi xuanping" ij~:z!s::t]~j~[.@]ffij~~Wf. In idem, Honglou meng shi ci qu fu pingzhu, pp. 376-97. Cai Yuanfang ~jG"fjj_. Dong Zhou Lieguo zhi *ml:YU~;:E;. Beijing: Zhongguo shudian, 1986. - - - . Xiyou zhengdao qishu ®Wtm~~~- Microfilm (dufa, preface, and illustrations only). Gest Oriental Library, Princeton University.

352

Works Cited

Cai Zhongxiang ~H:lrn. Zhongguo gudian julun gaiyao q:t~~~'~mfB~~. Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue, 1988. Cao Hong ff!RI. "Zuozhuan xiuci zhong de 'bangfan' wenti" 1J:f~f~I$$B"Jf:*8~ F~=~~m!. Nanjing daxue xuebao f¥l*:*:~~¥~ 1986.3: 72-76. Cao Xueqin lf~ff and Gao E n::u~. Honglou meng ~Iff~. Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1964. - - . Honglou meng~Ifl~. Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1982. Cao Yusheng ffbJmj:_. "Zhiping 'manbi' bian" H~gzp¥j¥j~f.J¥. Hubei shifan xueyuan xuebao mJ~t~ffiiB~~%~¥~ 1987.1: 51-58. Reprinted in Honglou meng yanjiu 1988.1: 73-80. Chen Bingliang ~l'W3$!. "Huaben taoyu de yishu" ~3-:zls:~~B"J~{ilt:f. Xiaoshuo xiqu yanjiu ;J\~.ftltX8±HiffJE 1 (1988): 145-82. Chen Chen ~ltt. Shuihu houzhuan 7.kt*13tf$. Shaoyu tang ed., n.d. Copy in Beijing Library. - - . Shuihu houzhuan 7](7*1&{-$. In Shuihu xuji 7_k~*·~· Shanghai: Yadong tushuguan, 1924. Chen Chun ~lyf. Beixi ziyi ~t~*~· Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983. Chen Dakang ~**'*· "Lun Ming Qing zhi ji de shishi xiaoshuo" mfBBJJY:~z~g S'J~JJ;J\~_ft. Huadong shifan daxue xuebao ¥*~ffliB*~~¥~ 1991.4: 70-76. Reprinted in Zhongguo gudai jindai wenxue yanjiu 1991.11: 303-9. Chen Dunfu ~l~ffi. Xiyou ji shiyi: Longmen xinchuan ~Wfgc~~WF~{,I{$. Taibei: Quanzhen chuban she, 1976. Chen Duo ~l~ andYe Changhai ~~®, eds. Zhongguo lidai julun xuanzhu $~ JfiH~IJ~mf0~?1:. Changsha: Hunan wenyi, 1987. Chen Hong ~*~~. "Shi Shuihu Jinpi yinyuan sheng fa shuo" ~7_k~~:f.tt!EJ~j:_ ~m. Nankai xuebao [$jt"*J~¥~ 1984.2: 42-47, 75. - - . Zhongguo gudai xiaoshuo yishulun fawei $~~{-t;J\m~fil'qmfD~~. Tianjin: Nankai daxue, 1987. - - . Zhongguo xiaoshuo lilun shi q:t~;J\~.ft~mfB_r£. Hefei: Anhui wenyi, 1992. Chen Huijuan ~ltiY~. "Wenxue chuangzuo yu wenxue piping de heliu: Zhongguo gudai pingdian xiaoshuo chutan" X~EUf'FW)C~tJtgzpB"J-§lmE$~~{-tWF~-6 !j\~.ft1JJ~. Tianjin shehui kexue *?$*±wrf4~ 1993.2: 58-61. Reprinted in Zhongguo gudai jindai wenxue yanjiu 1989.11: 207-20. Chen Jinzhao ~t£~~1j. Li Zhi zhi wenlun *Jr.Z)CmfB. Taibei: Jiaxin shuini gongsi, 1974. Chen Lang ~tAA. Xue Yue Mei zhuan ~)=3~{$. Ji'nan: Qi Lu shushe, 1986. Chen Meilin ~*~**· "Guanyu Rulin waishi 'Youbang' de zuozhe ji qi pingjia wenti" ID1~f~-Lj}_r£~#JS'Jf'F:tf&;!tWFf.lr~=~~mi. In idem, Wu ]ingzi yanjiu, pp. 271-90. - - . "Honglou meng shibi sanlun" ~Ifl~_r£~~mf0. Hebei shiyuan xuebao filJ~t~iP~%~~ 1985.3:77-82. Honglou mengyanjiu 1985.5:21-26. - - . "Lun Rulin waishi de yishu jiegou" mf0f~1*7}.'£t¥;J~f;lt:f*5:fM. In idem, Wu jingzi yanjiu, pp. 227-54. - - . Wu jingzi yanjiu ~~:f¥1itfJE. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1984. - - . XinpiRulin waishi iT:f.tt{~#j}_r£. Nanjing: Jiangsu guji, 1989.

Works Cited

353

Chen Ming ~t~f®. "Honglou meng shibi sanlun" ~I.fl~_9::~~ffif0. Hebei shiyuan xue· bao iPiit§ffi~~¥~ 1985.3: 77-82. Chen Pingyuan ~tSf)]{ and Xia Xiaohong :I:~!III, eds. Ershi shiji Zhongguo xiaoshuo lilun ziliao, di yi juan, 1897-1916 -=+tit*C.r:f::l~;j\~ffl!ffif0~*4~-~. Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1989. Chen Qianyu ~-*~~. Zhongguo xiaoshuo lilun piping shi r:f::l~;J\~Jt~mfa:t.ltW-f.9::. Shanghai: Huadong shifan daxue, 1989. Chen Qinghao ~t!l¥*, ed. Xinbian Shitou ji Zhiyan zhai pingyu jijiao $JT~n~JUC. ~~iM~W-fm~;tX. Rev. ed. Beijing: Zhongguo youyi, 1987. Chen Qitai ~tJt:~. Tonghua [eng ge ping Honglou meng jilu mJ:f"EJil~W-f~I.fl~ ~~.Ed. Liu Caonan ~U:J:*f¥.j· Tianjin: Tianjin renmin, 1981. Chen Qixin ~t:!tf"B. "Du Honglou meng suibi kao" ~~I.fl~ful~*t. ]iangsu jiaoyu xueyuan xuebao ?I~f~C~~~JG~¥~ 1988.2: 59-64. Reprinted in Honglou meng yanjiu 1988.3: 70-75. Chen Ruheng ~tifr1tr. Wu Jingzi zhuan ~~Wf-'· Shanghai: Shanghai wenyi, 1981. Chen Sen~-*~· Pinhua baojian ~:f"Eftfi. Beijing: Baowen tang, 1989. Chen Shou ~t#. Sanguo zhi ~;E;. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959. Chen Wanyi ~*~~.fin Shengtan de wenxue piping kaoshu &~ltzft-J)(~j=ltWP*tmt. Taibei: Taida wenxue yuan, 1976. Chen Xiang ~ti}. "Lun Jin Shengtan shi de piping fangfa" ffifO&~lt:r\B"l:t.ltW-fjj~. Shuping shumu ~W-f~§ 4 pts.: 1974.11: 30-36, 18: 80-86, 19: 59-66,20: 51-61. Chen Xianghua ~-*~~. "Mao Zonggang de shengping yu Sanguo yanyi Mao pingben de Jin Shengtan xu wenti" =B*WiiB"l~If.W=~~~~=BW-f*B"J&~ltz)T FQ~~. Wenxian )(Jik 1989.3: 68-86. Reprinted in Zhongguo gudai jindai wenxue yanjiu 1989.11: 207-20. Chen Xin ~t$JT and Du Weimo t±*ltK. "Rulin waishi de wushiliu hui zhenwei bian" f~.f*5'}.9::8'-Jli +~@J!l!~tJ¥. In Rulin waishi yanjiu lunwen ji, pp. 15364. Chen Xizhong ~tBfii!. "Guanyu Zhong Bojing xiansheng piping Shuihu zhongyi zhuan" !im~iifB~7t~:tJ:tW-f7.k7~t~,~f$. Wenxian Jtlk 15 (1983): 42-52. - - . "'Shende]in Ping hu'ao"' ~Wf~&mL~~. Qiushi xuekan *Jf~fU 1982.4: 95-97. - - . "Shuo 'zhen you shi shi' " ~Jt!li=f ~$. In Liu Mengxi fjjp~~' ed. Hongxue sanshi nian lunwen xuan ~I~= +if.ffifB)(~, 3: 384-87. Tianjin: Baihua wenyi, 1984. Chen Xizhong ~tBfii!, Hou Zhongyi f!Jt~'~' and Lu Yuchuan ~kf.J II, eds. Shuihu zhuan huiping ben J.kmtf-'11WP*· Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1981. Chen Xizhong ~tBfii!, Song Xiangrui *f$Jffij, and Lu Yuchuan ~,.:EJ II, eds. Sanguo yanyi huiping ben= ~~~~~WP*· Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1986. Cheng Duanli li.lllffi11. Chengshi jiashu dushu fennian richeng li.f£:*~~~51-if. B fj_. Sibu congkan IZ9fiBilfU ed. Chu Renhuo m.AJi. ]ianhu ji ~5JJl~. Hangzhou: Zhejiang renmin, 1986. - - . S u i Tangyanyi ~~~~~. Changchun: Shidai wenyi, 1985. - - . Sui Tang yanyi ~~~~~. Beijing: Zhongguo shudian, 1986. Chugi Suikoden kai J~'~J.kmtf-'M· In Towa jisho ruishu, vol. 3.

=

354

Works Cited

Cui Zi'en ~-T-,1~1_. Li Yu xiaoshuo lungao *¥f~vJ\~~mfB~- Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 1989. Dazi zuben Sanguo yanyi ;E:;;$:= ~;E;?Jl[~. Hong Kong: Shanghai yinshu guan, 1977. Ding Xigen T~f.lt "Jiaodian houji" fX~lif&g~. In Li Yu, Wusheng xi, pp. 211-22. Ding Yaokang T~1G- Xu fin Ping Mei *l~tmffil. In Huang Lin jfft, ed. ]in Ping Mei xushu sanzhong ~ttliffil*f~=fj. Ji'nan: Qi Lu shushe, 1988. "Disanjie quanguo Shuihu xueshu taolun hui qingkuang zongshu" ~=@~~l.kim= ~Vfq~tmfBwfl'ff¥Jt~0Hz&. Hubei daxue xuebao ~~t-j(~~¥~ 1985.6: 136. Dong Yue li'~- Xiyou bu g§3!ft:fjfi. Photoreprint of 1641 ed. Beijing: Wenxue guji, 1955. - - . Xiyou bu g§3!ft:fjfi. In Wang Wenru .3:.)(~, Shuoku g~J1ll- Photoreprint. Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji, 1986. Dong Zhongshu lif$1%f. Chunqiu fanlu 1ff;}c~S- Sibu beiyao [Z_gff~fmi~ ed. Du Gang t±~- Yumu xingxin bian ~§ ~~IH}I\i. Shujing tang ed., n.d. Du Guichen t±Jt~- "Mao Zonggang yong Liu fan Cao yi zai fan Qing fu Ming" =B*F.?ri:tJIU.&ffg::t£.5(mm:aJl Sanguo yanyi xuekan =~?Jl[~~fiJ 1 (1985): 279-85. Du Shuying t±~A- Lun Li Yu de xiju meixue mfB*~i¥J~IJU~~- Beijing: Zhangguo shehui kexue, 1982. Fan Shengtian ffiJmffi, ed. Zhongguo gudian xiaoshuo yishu jifa lishi $~ti~!J\m ~VJtj:j:j:~fJtl~- Hangzhou: Zhejiang guji, 1989. Fan Ye ffi •. Hou Hanshu 1&tli~- Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1963. Fang Mao tJ~- "Kebei de lishi daozhuan (Ping Hongxue suoyin pai de 'fuhuo')" PJ1Ji¥1~9;:fflJ$$W~~I~*~~VKI¥1mrli. Shantou daxue xuebao Ll.J~Jt-j(~~¥~ 1988.4: 11-19. Reprinted in Honglou meng yanjiu 1989.1: 40-47. Fang Ruhao tJif;((fi. Chanzhen yishi :ffil!)i~9;:. Ji'nan: Qi Lu shushe, 1986. Fang Xuanling tJ::te%, ed.jinshu fi"~- Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974. Fang Zhengyao tJ.LE~- "Zhongguo gudai xiaoshuo de shiti jiegou" $~ti{~!J\g~ i¥J.9;:R*I1ffff. Huadong shifan daxue xuebao ~'f*gffifa-j(~~¥~ 1986.5: 68-74, 67. - - . Zhongguo xiaoshuo piping shilue $~1j\~~:tltWP9;:Pm. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 1990. Feng Baoshan {,~{*~- "Dong Yue jiaoliu kao" li'~X7Trt~- Wenxian )CJIA 1992.1: 43-57. - - . "]ingu qiguan jizhe Baoweng laoren kao" ~ti~~'ilfHE!~~.A~­ Wenxue yichan )(~:iii~ 1988.5: 125-26. - - . "Ye tan Xiyou bu de zuozhe" {Q.~g§3!ft:flfii¥J{"ff3. Ming Qing xiaoshuo yanjiu BJ3m';J\mWf~ 1988.2: 235-40. Feng Menglong {,~~00- Feng Menglong shiwen chubian {,~~'00~)(1)]1\i. Ed. Ju Jun f~;ft. Fuzhou: Haixia wenyi, 1985. - - . Gujin xiaoshuo ti~lj\g~. Beijing: Wenxue guji, 1955. --.Jingshi tongyan Wtlt$§. Photoreprint ed. Taibei: Shijie shuju, 1958. --.jingshi tongyan ¥tlt3m§. Typeset ed. Taibei: Dingwen shuju, 1971. - - . Xingshi hengyan mEtlt1£L§. Photoreprint ed.Taibei: Shijie shuju, 1959. - - . Xingshi hengyan ~1:!!:'1&§. Typeset ed. Taibei: Dingwen shuju, 1978.

**

Works Cited

355

- - . Yushi mingyan Ufut!tSJ3 §. Taibei: Dingwen shuju, 1980. Feng Qiyong {,~;!tJI, ed. Zhiyan zhai chongping Shitou ji huijiao ben ~~liJt~!i~ £,UJ[~[.~ft:;$:. Beijing: Wenhua yishu, 1989. Feng Qiyong {,~;!t/m and Li Xifan :$:;ffi" }L, eds. Honglou meng da cidian ~~fl~ *l¥!lt!- Beijing: Wenhua yishu, 1990. Feng Shujian {,~{Wii. "Liangbai nian lai Honglou xuan'an xintan (Tan 'Yi Qin yi Zhi' zhi mi)" ~aif-*~~tl~~~t~~-ff=-H~Z~- Daxue wenke yuandi *~)(f4~t-tB 1988.1: 16-19. Reprinted in Honglou mengyanjiu 1988.1:69-72. Feng Weimin {.~fl:R- "Zhang Yun fuzi yu Ping Shan Leng Yan" ~~5(-::f-~ iftl.Jt~.g- T JfXJjUI.!J:*. In Rulin waishi yanjiu lunwen ji, pp. 270-81. - - . Zhongguo gudai xiaoshuo yishu lun $~if{~lj\gJt~{iltjmfa. Tianjin: Baihua wenyi, 1987. Lu Gong ~I. Fangshu jianwen lu gjjil= ~lifJMftfXEtB1JtWP. Hanxue yanjiu y~~utfj"E 6.1 (1988): 395-406.

"Mao pi Honglou meng ~1Jt~Ifl~." ]iefang jun ribao Feb. 20, 1990. Reprinted in Honglou meng yanjiu 1990.1: 2. Lu Xun .ffi. Lu Xun quanji ~,ffi~~. 16 vols. Shanghai: Renmin wenxue, 1981. --."Tan Jin Shengtan" ~~1fz~lX. In idem, Nanqiang beidiao r¥J~~t~. In Lu Xun quanji, 4: 527-30. - - . Zhongguo xiaoshuo shilue $jgiDij\g>t~~. In Lu Xun quanji. 9: 1-297. Lu Shoujun

~~J#~{J.

~Itfit~ B ¥~,

362

Works Cited

Lii Xiong g~~- Nuxian waishi R{tl.J)'}~. Tianjin: Baihua wenyi, 1985. Luan Xing ~£, ed. Qilu deng yanjiu ziliao J]:)(~tfHiffj"G~;f3J.. Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou shuhua she, 1982. Luge ~-rJX. '']in Ping Mei zuozhe bushi Feng Menglong" :&ttJiffiJf'F:t"/f~{,~~'ijg. In idem and Ma Zheng,Jin Ping Mei zongheng tan, pp. 119-35. Luge ~-rJX and Ma Zheng ,fit{_[. fin Ping Mei zongheng tan :&ttliffiJ~tJi~. Beijing: Beijing Yanshan, 1992. - - . "Tan fin Ping Mei de sizhong banben" ~~:&ttliffiJI¥Jtz:9fllt&/.$:. In idem, fin Ping Mei zongheng tan, pp. 44-68. Luo Guanzhong &Jf$. Sanguo zhi tongsu yanyi ~;E;)ffi{~?~~- Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1980. Ma Tiji ,fitrrff~, ed. Shuihu shulu 7_kffi!F~~- Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1986. - - . Shuihu ziliao huibian 7_kffi!F~;pj.~~U~. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1980. Maeno Naoaki IW!filff,fj. "Ming Qing shiqi liangzhong duili xiaoshuo lun: Jin Shengtan yu Ji Yun" 13J3m~M~ftft.lr.;J\~JtmfU:&~~:W-*C.B~. Tran. Chen Xizhang ~tal•. Gudai wenxue lilun yanjiu ""i!l{i:)C~~mfUUJfj"G 5 (1981): 44-71. Mao Zedong zhexue pizhu ji daolun =B~*;gf~:f.l:t?1:~~mfB. Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao, 1988. Mei Jie ffijJi'p. "Xi 'Fengjie dianxi, Zhiyan zhibi"' fJTJI1.9il'-~f:M~~Ji¥A~. In idem and MaLi ,fitj], Hongxue ougeng ji ~J:~fMf}t~. Hong Kong: Sanlian shudian, 1988, pp. 109-19. Mei Qingji ffiJ!fa. "Xin faxian de Jin Shengtan zhuzuo 'Xiaoti caizi wen'" iT~fJii¥J:&~~~{'f;J\m::t-f-)C. Beifang luncong ~t:JJmfBif 1990.5: 41-44. Meng Fanren :rii!H=. "Xu Guanzhong shi Luo Guanzhong de xuxiang" ~lfW$~ &W$1¥J~{~.finyan~ xuekan ff~~fU 1990.4: 19-27. Ming Qing xiaoshuo xuba xuan 13J3m;J\~ff:lf!~. Shenyang: Chunfeng wenyi, 1983. Mori Junsaburo ~~~= ,M. "Kyokutei Bakin o to Wa Kan shosetsu no hihyo" ffH¥ ,fit~@J C: 5fD¥~;j\~Jt