Words Well Put
Page 8
bowing, and touching his head to the ground” 公子降拜稽首. This
surfeit of humility causes the duke to redress the imbalance imme-
diately by “descending one step to decline the gesture” 公降一級而
辭焉. Zhao Cui, being culturally competent, realizes that he must
explain the reason behind the prince’s excessive display of grati-
tude—that it is warranted and not simply a result of overstepping
the bounds of decorum. It is in this explanation that Zhao Cui’s
reading of the duke’s poetic response is made public. Ideally, the
exchange of poetry should have been transparent, taking place
—————
38. The term bai 拜 indicates “kneeling, then bending until the head is level with the waist and the fingers touch the ground” ( Hanyu da cidian, s.v. “bai”). It does not normally entail touching one’s head to the ground.
This content downloaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Performing the Tradition
45
without commentary. It is only when things start to break down
that the need to discuss them explicitly arises. 39
In explaining the prince’s extraordinary show of humility, Zhao
Cui says, “Your lordship referred to Chong’er as a means ‘to help
the Son of Heaven’ in giving him your command. How could he
dare not to bow down” 君稱所以佐天子者命重耳。重耳敢不拜?
On the surface this statement simply explains ritual action (bowing)
as a response to a poetic offering, but on closer reading it reveals
itself to be a way of controlling meaning in reception—a shrewd
demonstration of poetic competence. First, Zhao Cui characterizes
Duke Mu’s entire poetic offering as a “command” 命 to Chong’er,
taking the poem not simply as a call to arms, but as a commitment
by Duke Mu to be the figure of authority behind Chong’er’s cam-
paign. The traditional reading of this poem, amply supported by the
poem’s internal evidence, is that it is an ode in praise of Jifu, who
was sent on a military expedition by King Xuan (r. 827–782 b.c.e.) to
do battle against the northern Xianyun tribe, which was making
incursions into Zhou territory. Zhao Cui casts Duke Mu in the role
of the Zhou king and Prince Chong’er in the role of Jifu. Just as
King Xuan outfitted Jifu with a military force and commanded him
to rid the kingdom of its enemies, so too will Duke Mu outfit Prince
Chong’er and command him to expel the slanderers from the state
of Jin. Zhao Cui clearly indicates this relationship when he quotes
directly from the duke’s poetic offering, saying that it refers to the
prince “as a means ‘to help the Son of Heaven.’” Duke Mu, as the
implied referent for the term “Son of Heaven,” deserves the pro-
found show of respect that the prince has given him. And thus Zhao
Cui is able to explain why Prince Chong’er felt it necessary to touch
his head to the ground in accepting the poem. 40
—————
39. Ironically, it is the need to explain things that are no longer self-evident in a context of decline that constitutes the raison d’être of the Traditionalists, even as they endeavor to halt that decline. If the Traditionalists were ever to be truly successful, they would put themselves out of a job. However, as Confucius, and later, Mencius, found, telling someone what is right and getting them to act on it are entirely different matters.
40. A conservative Traditionalist advisor by the name of Meng Wubo 孟武伯 is quoted in the Zuo Tradition as stating that only the Zhou King can properly receive This content downloaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
46
Performing the Tradition
This small rupture in ritual, and the attempt to repair it with
words, opens up a window through which to view the essence of
poetic offering as ritual reenactment. Poetic offering functions as an
effective diplomatic tool for negotiating the tension between
commonality and difference. The commonality underlying the of-
fering of poetry is found in its ritual context (most often the ban-
quet) and in the corpus of words on offer—the Poems. Offering a
poem is a way of reenacting a ritual that has been reenacted count-
less times before, thus signaling adherence to the ground rules of a
diplomatic encounter. In many cases, and particularly in the for-
mulaic welcome of the host and the response by the guest, offering a
poem is a sort of phatic communication, the content of the words
being secondary to the practice of their utterance as means of es-
tablishing an air of sociability.
Where difference arises is not in the form of ritual offering, nor in
the words on offer, but between individual instances of application
and interpretation of an offered poem. The room for difference
arises out of the status of the Poems as words inherited from the past.
There is a gap between then and now, between that place and this
place. An educated man of the Eastern Zhou manifests his poetic
competence in how his utterance and understanding of the Poems
bridges that gap. Some Traditionalists assume the position that
ritualistic poetic offering can only be legitimately reenacted by
people who are in direct lineage with the “originating” parties, the
ones who participated in the initial poetic exchange that produced a
given poem. Poetic competence in this case means the ability to
recognize and respond appropriately to the propriety or impropri-
ety of a particular poetic offering. In practice, this means that the
pieces in the Poems directed to the Zhou king during the Western Zhou should only be directed to the Zhou king in the Eastern
Zhou. 41 And poems originating in a particular state are properly
—————
a kowtow (Ai 17.6). Zhao Cui is obviously more expedient in his interpretation of ritual, which may indicate a more flexible attitude among the early Traditionalists.
41. An envoy from Wei, by the name of Ning Wuzi 甯武子, refuses to respond
to poems offered to him at a banquet by the Duke of Lu. When asked the reason for his behavior, he says that it would constitute a crime to accept the “grand honors”
大禮 reserved for Zhou kings and princes (Wen 4). Another fastidious Tradition-This content downloaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Performing the Tradition
47
sung only by people from that state. 42 These strictures seek to stabilize interpretation by narrowing the field of application. They are
an attempt to halt the disintegration of an old order of the world by
tying it to an old order of words.
The more agile among the Traditionalists realize that though the
old world order may be irrecoverable, the old words still have po-
tency as means of effecting a better new world order along the lines of the old world order. This again is analogous thinking. The Poems may be perceived as having specific points of origin, but this does
not preclude them from being used outside the parameters of those
origins if they are taken as examples of general principles that still
&nbs
p; apply (or at least should apply) to the present situation. In this case, poetic competence in utterance means choosing the right poem and
pitching it to the right person at the right time and place, so that its relevance is so apparent that its cogency cannot be easily denied.
Poetic competence in understanding means being able to recognize
that relevance and to incorporate it as a factor in one’s own utter-
ance in response. Differences can arise in how relevance is measured.
Two people could have different interpretations of the same poetic
offering because each of them has applied the poem to the situation
at hand in slightly different ways. This is a matter of interiority,
which does not find its way to the surface of Zuo Tradition narratives. Such differences amidst commonality can only be inferred by
subsequent behavior and words.
When Prince Chong’er makes his deep obeisance to Duke Mu, it
implies a certain understanding of the poem offered by the duke.
The duke’s explicit rejection of the prince’s obeisance is an implicit
rejection of the prince’s reading, which the duke has inferred from
the prince’s behavior. There is a difference between how the duke
intended his poem to be applied to the situation at hand and how
the prince (via Zhao Cui) chooses to apply it. Prince Chong’er’s
initial poetic offering to the duke was less problematic because it
lacks the specificity of the poem given by the duke in response. The
—————
alist, Zhao Meng, refuses to accept various poetic offerings from the officials of Zheng because they should be directed to rulers instead (Xiang 27).
42. Xuanzi 宣子 asks the ministers of Zheng to perform songs of Zheng for him at a parting banquet so that he can ascertain “the mind of Zheng” (Zhao 16).
This content downloaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
48
Performing the Tradition
prince’s poem lacks internal evidence tying it to a particular person,
place, or audience. The “Lesser Preface” 小序 tells us that it was
originally composed “to regulate King Xuan” 規宣王也 of the late
Western Zhou era, but the poem itself can easily be generalized as a
blanket complaint against the absence of a political will to quell the
rise of petty men and slander. A strict Traditionalist might object to
the offering of this poem to the Duke of Qin rather than the King of
Zhou, but the general principle articulated in it is readily apparent
and obviously related to Prince Chong’er’s own situation. The role
set out for Duke Mu as the “brother” and “friend” who should come
to the aid of the victim is also plain. Duke Mu would have to be
quite obtuse to miss these points. It is the very specificity of Duke
Mu’s response with “Sixth Month,” however, that facilitates a dif-
ference in application and interpretation. It is possible, even prob-
able, that Duke Mu meant the poem to be interpreted as synecdo-
che: “King Xuan is an example of a ruler who was concerned with
quelling disorder, as a good ruler should be. I am such a ruler as well, and so I will help you.” Zhao Cui, however, understands the poem
analogically: “Prince Chong’er is to Jifu as you, Duke Mu, are to
King Xuan, the Son of Heaven. You order him to lead your forces
against the enemy.” In the end, it is Zhao Cui’s reading that stands
because it is the only one made public by the Zuo Tradition narrative. If the prince’s initial poetic offering is encompassed under this
analogical reading, the entire poetic exchange effectively recasts the
state of Qin as the center of power, deserving of words meant
originally for Zhou and possessing authority originally reserved by
Zhou. Such flexibility in interpretation is what drives the staunchest
Traditionalists toward restricting the range of application to the
“original” set of parameters. But it is only through the willingness of
Traditionalists such as Zhao Cui to step outside these parameters
that the Tradition can remain relevant to a changing world, one that
may no longer have Zhou at its center.
It is no accident that, in this brief narrative surrounding a poetic
exchange at a banquet, the Zuo Tradition gives all of the directly quoted words before the banquet to Hu Yan and those at the banquet to Zhao Cui. The principal partners in the exchange—the
prince and duke—simply perform their set pieces and step aside. It is
This content downloaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Performing the Tradition
49
the secondary players, the advisors, who are given all of the lines
and even some of the stage directions. They are the ones who fa-
cilitate the ritual and attach meaning to it. They are the ones who
have the first and last word, converting practice into object lesson.
What is to be learned here is that the highest level of poetic com-
petence consists of more than knowing the Poems and ritual pro-
tocols. Mastery of the practice of poetic offering requires being able
to win some measure of control over how others are disposed to
interpret your utterance and how you choose to interpret theirs.
The ritual form of offering and the restricted repertoire of poems
that may be offered do place limitations on such control, but the
truly competent are able to turn such limitations to their advantage
by mastering them. They can win control by exploiting the vari-
ables of the ritual, taking the time, place, and recipient of their of-
ferings into account. They may also exploit gaps in the repertoire,
bridging the distance between the “then” of the Poems and the
“now” of their application according to their own agenda. It is no
accident that it is Traditionalist advisors who are most often heard
in the narratives of the Zuo Tradition explicitly discussing the proprieties surrounding the offering of poetry. It is they who have been
inculcated with the lessons encoded in the Tradition, and it is they
who are the custodians of ritual modes of performance. In other
words, it is they who have intimate knowledge of what should be
said ( lexis) and how it should be said ( hexis). This guarantees them the highest degree of success in controlling interpretation, which is
the ultimate goal of every scholar-exegete.
The competence that allows a smooth performance of Tradition
through poetic offering must efface itself to be effective. It remains
submerged, hidden to both parties in the exchange, even as it guides the exchange. To overtly signal the presence of ulterior motives in a
poetic performance would be to remove the semblance of sponta-
neity and sincerity that give the performance its suasive power. This
explains why the only occasions in which the Zuo Tradition can
depict explicit discussions of poetic competence is when that com-
petence is partially or completely absent. 43 In these cases, the failure
—————
43. Confucius’s own discussions of poetic competence in the Analects are always framed in the negative. For a practice that is best carried out when its principles are This content downl
oaded from 130.111.46.54 on Sat, 03 Aug 2019 08:33:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
50
Performing the Tradition
is framed and made discernible by a larger discussion of it. If a
performance goes off smoothly, it is signaled by a lack of explicit comment. When the performance breaks down because one party is
not holding up his end and thus is impeding the satisfactory com-
pletion of the exchange, then comment about the performance may
intrude. This is a result of the performance taking place over time.
The offering of a poem immediately sets up a tension that requires
response for closure. If closure is not provided through appropriate
response, then the tension must be resolved through other means,
namely by subordinating the aborted performance to the status of
object of discourse.
Stand-up comedy provides an apt analogy. If a comedian tells a
joke and the audience laughs, then an appropriate exchange has
taken place, and he quickly moves on to the next joke without
comment. He builds upon the measure of approval he has won from
the audience and parlays it into a favorable disposition for his next
joke. Each successful exchange augments his authority to be stand-
ing before the audience as a comedian. To stop and say, “You must
have really enjoyed that joke—let me tell you why,” would kill his
momentum, unless it was a segue to another joke. However, if he
tells his joke and it “hangs there” without the expected laughter in
response, a palpable tension results. It must be resolved or he will
lose his authority to continue. He cannot simply move on to his
next joke and pretend nothing happened. If he is thinking quickly,
he will turn the failure of his joke into the object of his next joke,
which (if successful) will reestablish his authority. If his audience is thinking quickly, they will leap into the breach and heckle the
comedian, turning his failed joke into fodder for their own joke.
This is highly damaging to the comedian’s authority unless he can
turn the tables and make the heckler the object of his next joke. The