The Poetics of Sovereignty

Home > Other > The Poetics of Sovereignty > Page 17
The Poetics of Sovereignty Page 17

by Chen Jack W


  86. Wei Shang was a general during the reign of Han Wendi 漢文帝 (r. 180–157 bc), who

  was famed for his successes against the Xiongnu. See Shi ji, 102.2758–59. Li Mu was a gen-This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  90

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  problems faraway, but out of sympathy and love [for them], one cannot bear to

  do so; yet if one feels pity and does not send forth men, then the branches and

  leaves will fall and not be preserved. Of the two proper courses, upon which

  should the sovereign set his mind? Therefore, he may flourish at dawn but be

  fearful by dark—I cannot forget this fact. If it is like this for the ruler above, how much more so would it be for his subjects below!

  四海之內,莫非王土。要荒為枝葉,畿內乃根本。古人云:皮之不

  存,毛將安傅?當使本固根深,委之內相,而伊尹、傅說,人所希

  逢。至如鎮積冰之塞,守飛雪之邊,而魏尚、李牧,當今罕遇。遣人

  遠撫,則眷戀而不忍,愍而不遣,則枝葉落而不存。二宜之閒,致心

  何所?是用晨興夕惕,無忘斯事。為上猶然,何況臣下!

  Taizong asserts through an allusion to the Classic of Poetry that while all

  lands are the sovereign’s lands, the central domains must take priority

  over the distant frontier lands. When a crisis arises, impelling the sover-

  eign to dispatch troops to pacify the far reaches, he might stay his hand,

  feeling pity for the men he would have to send to their deaths. Yet if he

  stays his hand, then the distant lands will fall. From the historical circum-

  stances of Taizong’s reign, we know that the problem of the Eastern

  Turks was much on his mind at this point. To pursue a military solution

  would mean more warfare for a populace that had recently lived through

  the Tang pacification campaigns under Gaozu’s reign, and yet to ignore

  the threat posed by the Turks would ensure even greater instability for

  the empire.

  The image of anxiety and worry that Taizong summons here is how he

  desires his audience to think of him, weighted down with the cares of the

  empire, rather than exultant with the power at his command. It is an im-

  age of sovereignty that stands in direct contrast to the reckless abuse of

  power by the First Emperor of Qin and Han Wudi. This essay is, of

  course, a mirror ( jing 鏡)—a “moral speculum” that allows the sovereign

  to examine himself through past examples.87 It is important to realize,

  however, that the sovereign’s mirror is not just an instrument of moral

  self-reflection. As the sovereign “gazes” into the mirror, he is the object of

  —————

  eral in the state of Zhao 趙 who defeated various Turkish tribes and Xiongnu. See Shi ji, 81.2449–51.

  87. The figure of the moral speculum is found commonly also in Western literature. See Melchior-Bonnet, Mirror, pp. 114–15. Denis Twitchett discusses the sources for the metaphor of the mirror in Chinese political thought, in “How to Be an Emperor,” p. 8, n5.

  This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  91

  his court’s gaze, which watches him reflecting upon himself. There is al-

  ways an audience for the imperial speculum, and the act of self-reflection

  is always a public act. In this way, moral reflection becomes a recasting of

  the sovereign’s image, a claiming of sagely virtue that must be confirmed

  by the sovereign’s subjects, by the court that witnesses this staged per-

  formance. This relationship between private reflection and public display

  is born out in the concluding sentences of the essay:

  The Classic of Changes states: “Writing does not exhaust the words; the words do not exhaust the thoughts.”88 At present We have roughly conveyed this synopsis

  in order to display what is lodged within Our heart. An ancient adage says, “La-

  borers must sing about their work.” It is not in order to busy Ourself with brush

  and ink that We display literary floriage; it is only to study for Ourself and for the moment to write down what We hold inside. We long for it to reach and be seen

  by the throngs of worthies, and not be sneered at by them.

  易云:“書不盡言,言不盡意。”今略陳梗概,以示心之所存耳。古

  語云:“勞者必歌其事。”朕非故煩翰墨以見文藻,但學以為己,聊

  書所懷。想達見群賢,不以為嗤也。

  Though Taizong speaks throughout the essay as if in self-address—the

  sovereign ruminating upon his own virtues and flaws—his audience is the

  court and empire. His mirror reflects himself, but in such a way that oth-

  ers may see the perfected image within the text and identify the image

  with the one who has authored it. The mirror’s reflection is more than

  simply the passive imaginary object that the viewer beholds in the pol-

  ished metal surface; it is now the viewer itself, the reflection imbued with

  life through the audience’s recognition and recast as the viewer. What

  Taizong achieves with this essay is not merely the imitation of sagely vir-

  tue, but the public performance of virtue, a representation that presents

  its subject anew to—and by means of—the witnessing court and empire.

  “Model for the Emperor”

  At the very end of Taizong’s reign and life, he would revisit many of the

  statements that he had made as a young ruler for the purpose of providing

  instructions on rulership to his heir, the future Emperor Gaozong. This

  —————

  88. A comment attributed to Confucius in the “Commentary on Appended Phrases.” See

  Zhou yi zhengyi, 7.70c, in Shisanjing zhushu, p. 82.

  This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  92

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  work would be known as the “Model for the Emperor,” and it was divided

  into twelve paired sections, with a preface and a postface.89 In the preface,

  Taizong begins by stating how the power of the sovereign is invested in

  him by Heaven and is not self-authorized—alluding perhaps to the First

  Emperor who had thought otherwise. Taizong notes how heavenly por-

  tents inaugurated the reigns of Yao and Yu, as well as the dynasties of

  Zhou and Han, and then says, “To observe, on the basis of this, the

  achievement of emperors and kings, it is not what wisdom can strive for,

  and not what might can contest” 由此觀之,帝王之業,非可以智

  競,非可以力爭者矣.90 Taizong then goes on to discuss the fall of the

  Sui and the founding of the Tang, recontextualizing the rebellion of the

  Li clan as a transfer of the Heavenly Mandate. He ends the preface by ad-

  dressing the heir apparent, expressing his personal worry over the prince’s

  inexperience and explaining the purpose of “Model for the Emperor,”

  which is to provide the prince with a last set of admonitions drawn from

  the texts of the past.

  The first section is entitled “The Sovereign’s Body” 君體篇, an echo

&nbs
p; and transformation of the “The Way of the Sovereign” 君道篇 chapter

  from the Xunzi, as well as of the “Way of the Ruler” 主道 and “Grand

  —————

  89. The textual transmission of “Model for the Emperor” is complex. I summarize Denis Twitchett’s account here, which points out that while it was still being read at the imperial court in the Northern Song, only the second half of the text was still in circulation by the Southern Song. When the Yuan dynasty conquered the Dali kingdom in Yunnan, a complete copy of the text was discovered. This was incorporated into an early edition of the Ming dynasty Yongle dadian 永樂大典 ( Great Canon of the Yongle Reign), and through this, copied into the Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ( Complete Books of the Four Treasuries). The preface survived separately through its inclusion in the Wenyuan yinghua, 735.3824b–25a.

  Twitchett further notes that a separate Japanese and Korean tradition existed, and that the Japanese text is perhaps closest to the original Tang text. See Twitchett, “How To Be an Emperor,” pp. 38–50. Following Twitchett, my discussion is based on the Japanese text as it was collated by Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉 (1866–1940) and printed as Riben Kuanwen ben Di fan zhu erjuan Chengui zhu erjuan jiaoji erjuan 日本寬文本帝範注二卷臣軌注二卷

  校記二卷 (hereafter abbreviated as Di fan zhu). I have also consulted the notes in Tang Taizong quanji jiaozhu, pp. 591–622.

  90. Di fan zhu, 1.1a; Wenyuan yinghua, 735.3824b; and Tang Taizong quanji jiaozhu, p. 591.

  This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  93

  Compendium [Corpus]” 大體 chapters of the Han Feizi.91 It is here that

  he lays out the general principles of rulership. The text reads:

  The people are the fount of the state, and the state is the trunk of the sovereign.

  The ruler’s body can be compared to the sacred peaks, which are lofty and un-

  yielding; and it can be compared to the sun and moon, whose “constant illumina-

  tion” shines upon all in common.92 It is to him that the multitudes look up and

  crane their necks; and it is towards him that the empire turns. He should make

  broad his will, so that he will be able to enfold all equally. He should make fair

  and just his heart, so that he will be able to dictate judgments. If he is not awe-

  some in his power, he will have no means to reach the distant; if he is not mag-

  nanimous in his mercy, he will have no means to cherish the people. He should

  comfort the nine grades of kin with benevolence and receive the high ministers

  with ceremony. In serving the ancestors, he must keep filiality in mind; in dealing

  with inferiors, he must keep respect in mind. He must devote himself and assidu-

  ously labor, in order to practice virtue and righteousness. This constitutes the

  sovereign’s body.

  夫民者國之先,國者君之本。人主之體,如山岳焉,高峻而不動,如

  日月焉,貞明而普照。億兆之所瞻仰,天下之所歸往。寬大其志,足

  以兼苞,平正其心,足以制斷。非威德無以致遠,非慈厚無以懷民。

  撫九族以仁,接大臣以禮。奉先思孝,處後思恭,傾己勤勞,以行德

  義。此為君之體也。93

  The sense of the term ti 體 can be both corporeal (“body”) and abstract

  (“principles” or “substance”), and here, Taizong intends both meanings.

  He begins by describing the relationships of the sovereign ( jun 君) to the

  people ( min 民) and the state ( guo 國), figuring the people as the “fount”

  ( xian 先) of the state and the state as the trunk ( ben 本) of the sovereign.

  This passage recalls the Zizhi tongjian speech about the locusts, in which

  Taizong also enumerated the relationships among sovereign, state, and

  people in a similar manner. However, Taizong here goes on to liken the

  body ( ti 體) of the sovereign to the sacred peaks and to the sun and moon,

  —————

  91. For the “Way of the Sovereign” chapter, see Xunzi jijie, 8.12.230–46. For the “Way of the Ruler” and “Grand Compendium [or Corpus]” chapters, see Zengding Han Feizi

  jiaoshi, 7.685–95, 715–17.

  92. I follow a suggestion from David Knechtges that zhenming 真明 be emended to zhenming 貞明, which would echo the “Commentary on Appended Phrases”: “The Way of the sun and moon lies in their constant illumination” 日月之道,貞明者也. See Zhouyi

  zhengyi, 8.74a, in Shisanjing zhushu, p. 86.

  93. Di fan zhu, 1.2a–2b; and Tang Taizong quanji jiaozhu, pp. 595–96.

  This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  94

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  which, like the pole-star of Confucius’ analogy, creates a center around

  which the empire can be ordered. The rest of the passage is then made up

  of a series of prescriptions for the crown prince, which Taizong defines as

  constituting “the sovereign’s body” 君之體.

  There is a shift in rhetorical style from the organismic relationships de-

  scribed in the opening statement to the comparison of the sovereign to

  the sun and moon. It is not coincidental that this is precisely the point at

  which Taizong begins to paraphrase the “Techniques of the Ruler” 主術

  chapter in the Han dynasty philosophical compendium, the Huainanzi

  淮南子. Here is the relevant passage from the Huainanzi chapter:

  The place of the ruler is as bright as the sun and the moon. He is the one to

  whom the people all turn their eyes to look and turn their ears to listen, stretch-

  ing their necks and lifting up their heels to gaze [at him]. Therefore, if he is not tranquil and simple, he will have no way to let his virtue shine. If he is not broad and expansive, he will have no way to shelter all equally. If he is not merciful and magnanimous, he will have no way to embrace the crowds. If he is not fair and

  just, then he will have no way to dictate his judgments.

  人主之居也,如日月之明也,天下之所同側目而視,側耳而聽,延頸

  舉踵而望也。是故非澹薄無以明德,非寬大無以兼覆,非慈厚無以懷

  眾,非平正無以制斷。94

  The first sentence of this section depends upon a synecdochal logic, one

  also found within the Zizhi tongjian quotation. However, once Taizong

  begins to paraphrase the “Techniques of the Ruler” chapter, he also takes

  up its rhetorical mode, one that relies more heavily upon metaphor and

  simile in its figuration of the sovereign.95 Where synecdoche constructs an

  organic vision of the world (the relation of parts to the whole), metaphor

  —————

  94. See Huainan honglie jijie, 9.291. I have consulted the translation in Ames, Art of Rulership, pp. 187–88.

  95. Of course, the Huainanzi also uses synecdoche, as in the following passage: “Food is the basis of the people. The people are the basis of the state. The state is the basis of the sovereign” 食者,民之本也。民者,國之本也。國者,君之本也. See Huainan

  honglie jijie, 9.308. On a side note, I am treating metaphor and simile as genetically similar tropes. On this, I follow the classical rhetorician Demetrius, who wrote: “When a metaphor seems risky, turn it into a simile ( eikasia). Then it will be safer. A simile is an extended metaphor.” See Demetrius, On Style, p. 189.

  This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 o
n Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:38 UTC

  All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

  On Sovereignty and Representation

  95

  instead claims identity across ontologically distinct terms.96 If the meta-

  phor is successful, the identification of one thing with another will seem

  natural and self-explanatory. Thus, the comparison of the sovereign’s

  body to the sacred mountains gives physical correlation to the abstraction

  of the ruler’s authority and power, just as the comparison to the sun and

  moon provides an image for imperial grace, which is supposed to be shed

  impartially on all.

  Taizong only follows the Huainanzi’s argument up to a point, as the

  Han text is concerned with techniques and calculations of power, rather

  than with the cultivation of imperial virtue. And indeed, following the

  statement about making judgments, Taizong introduces the necessity of

  benevolence ( ren), ritual ( li 禮), filiality ( xiao 孝), and respect ( gong 恭)—virtues that have a clear Confucian provenance and embed the sovereign in a network of normative sociopolitical relations, rather than pre-

  senting him as a more abstract power on high. Here, we return to Tai-

  zong’s opening statement: insofar as the people are conceived as the

  “ancestor” of the state, and the state is conceived as the “root” of the sov-

  ereign, then the sovereign is neither detached from those he governs, nor

  is he a transcendent figure. On the contrary, Taizong says that he will

  “overturn the self and diligently labor.” The phrase “overturning the self”

  ( qingji 傾己), which may also be translated as “emptying the self” or

  “pouring out the self,” describes an act of askēsis, a self-humbling of the

  sovereign. Indeed, it is through this ascetic negation that “the body of the

  sovereign” is truly constituted.97

  —————

  96. For the distinction between metonymy, synecdoche, and metaphor, see Fontanier, Les Figures du discours, pp. 77–104. For a useful discussion of Fontanier’s tropology, see Ricoeur, Rule of Metaphor, pp. 55–59. Also see the entries on metaphor, metonymy, and synecdoche in Lausberg, Handbook of Literary Rhetoric, pp. 250–62. Lausberg identifies synecdoche as a species of metonymy.

 

‹ Prev