by Chen Jack W
By the time the Wenyuan yinghua collected the piece, Du You’s comment had become misprised as Pei’s own preface, which then also served to provide the title for the “essay.”
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
120
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
In the ancient past, the “Four Beginnings” and “Six Principles” were combined
for the composition of poetry.31 Poetry was used both to portray the manners of
the four quarters and to display the aims of the superior man, to encourage good-
ness and to castigate evil—kingly transformation was based on this. Later writers,
keeping their thoughts upon branches and leaves [that is, its inessential aspects],
multiplied ornament and hoarded elegance, and used poetry to express them-
selves, to make themselves known.
古者四始六藝，總而為詩。既形四方之氣，且彰君子之志，勸美懲
惡，王化本焉。後之作者，思存枝葉，繁華蘊藻，用以自通。
The argument begins by constructing the origins of poetry through the
fourfold generic divisions ( sishi 四始) and sixfold tropic schemes ( liuyi 六
藝) of the “Great Preface.” The combination of these genres and devices
represents the orthodox matrix of poetic composition, and when poetry
adheres to this model, it serves as the basis for kingly transformation
( wanghua 王化). The proper function of poetry is to represent the
world’s manners and to articulate moral aims. However, once poetry fo-
cuses on the secondary aspects of literary ornament, then poetry becomes a
debased thing, no longer directed toward moral transformation, but only
for the purpose of zitong 自通, which conveys both the sense of making
one’s feelings known to the world and seeking to be known by the world.
At this point, Pei Ziye turns to the historical development of poetry af-
ter the Classic of Poetry. This is a narrative of poetry’s failure, as the moral abdication of poetry is manifested through a show of rhetorical excess,
which itself reflects the desire of poets to express and promote themselves,
to foreground the personal and subjective at the expense of illuminating
ethical principles. Pei writes,
As for despondent sorrow [expressed through] florid perfume, the “Encounter-
ing Sorrow” of Chu was the ancestor; and as for finely-wrought beauty [depicted
with] unrestrained excess, Sima Xiangru harmonized to such tones. From this
point, the sort to pursue echoes and shadows cast aside the critical essence and
had nothing on which to hold; rhapsodies, lyric poems, songs, and odes num-
bered by the hundreds of sackloads, enough to fill five whole carts. Cai Yong
—————
31. This refers to the discussion of poetic techniques and genres in the “Great Preface.”
The “Four Beginnings” 四始 are the four generic divisions of feng 風, xiaoya 小雅, daya 大雅, and song 頌. The “Six Arts” are the “Six Principles” 六義, which consist of feng 風, fu 賦, bi 比, xing 興, ya 雅, and song 頌.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
121
viewed this as clownish entertainment,32 while Yang Xiong regretted what he had
done as a young man.33 Now that sages no longer appear, who can distinguish be-
tween elegant music and the music of Zheng?34
若悱惻芳芬，楚《騷》為之祖，靡漫容與，相如和其音。由是隨聲逐
影之儔，棄指歸而無執，賦詩歌頌，百帙五車。蔡邕等之俳優，楊雄
悔為童子。聖人不作，雅鄭誰分？
Pei’s narrative posits two origins for poetry, the first being the Classic of
Poetry, and the second, the “Li sao” 離騷 (“Encountering Sorrow”) of the
Chu ci. If the Classic of Poetry represents the timeless principles of the sages, then the “Li sao” is a fall into a compromised historical temporality.
For Pei, the problem is that the poetics of “Li sao” initiated a shift from
the moral and political role of poetry to one that emphasized private feel-
ings and rhetorical extravagance. The figure of Qu Yuan is not named
here; instead the first named poet in Pei’s narrative is Sima Xiangru,
whose rhapsodies emerge from the discursive repertoire of the Chu ci. Po-
etry may have flourished from this time onwards; however, it is the very
profusion of poetry that makes it difficult—in the absence of a sage—to
discern between the proper and the improper, between the elegant ( ya 雅)
and the music of Zheng 鄭.
At this juncture, a third origin is posited, one that concerns the emer-
gence of the pentasyllabic poem ( wuyan shi 五言詩) in the Han dynasty:
As for the tradition of pentasyllabic poetry, it arose with Su Wu and Li Ling;35
Cao Zhi and Liu Zhen strengthened the force of its influence;36 and Pan Yue and
—————
32. Cai Yong castigated the use of rhapsody composition as a criterion in the selection of officials in a sealed document he presented to the Eastern Han Emperor Ling 靈帝 (r.
168–89). See Hou Han shu, 60B.1996. This is discussed in Knechtges, “Court Culture in the Late Eastern Han.” The Wenyuan yinghua (and Yan Kejun’s text) mistakenly read
“Cai Ying” 蔡應 as the author.
33. This is an allusion to Yang Xiong’s comment about “carving insect-characters,” discussed above.
34. The “music of Zheng” is a standard figure for lascivious customs. For example, see Lunyu 15.10 / Lunyu jishi, 31.1087.
35. Su Wu 蘇武 (140–60 bc) and Li Ling 李陵 (d. 74 bc) are traditionally considered the
authors of a body of ancient-style poetry ( gushi 古詩). Though few critics now believe this attribution, if it were true, they would have been the first known poets to compose in pentasyllabic verse.
36. “Cao” 曹 here refers to Cao Zhi 曹植 (192–232), son of Cao Cao and younger half-
brother of Cao Pi. Cao Zhi was the most talented poet of the Jian’an 建安 period (196–
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
122
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
Lu Ji made firm its branches and leaves.37 Following the move south of the Yang-
tze, people acclaimed Yan Yanzhi and Xie Lingyun; their “embroidered finery ex-
tended even to sash and handkerchief,” and was not employed for court occa-
sions.38 From the beginning of the Song through the Yuanjia reign, there was
much focus on classics and histories, 39 but by the period of the Daming reign,
they truly loved literary culture.40 The outstanding verses of the greatest talents
rather paled before those of the former worthies; waves and currents reinforced
one another, and they grew even more pronounced.
其五言詩為家，則蘇、李自出，曹、劉偉其風力，潘、陸固其枝葉，
爰及江左，稱彼顏、謝，箴繡鞶帨，無取廟堂。宋初迄于元嘉，多為
經史，大明之代，實好斯文。高才逸韻，頗謝前哲，波流相尚，滋有
篤焉。
One might expect Pei to problematize the pentasyllabic line, since it co
uld
be seen as displacing the quadrisyllabic form long associated with the Clas-
sic of Poetry. However, the writing of poetry from Su Wu and Li Ling in the
Western Han to Pan Yue and Lu Ji in the Western Jin is discussed only in
—————
220). Among his corpus is the first known pentasyllabic poem-cycle, “Poems Presented to Prince Biao of Boma” 贈白馬王彪詩. Liu Zhen 劉楨 (d. 217) was one of the Seven Masters of the Jian’an 建安七子.
37. Pan Yue 潘岳 (247–300) and Lu Ji here represent the poets of the Western Jin. Pan
Yue is best known for his poems lamenting his dead wife, while Lu Ji wrote, among other pieces, a series of imitations of gushi. Here, Pei seems to be following Shen Yue’s postface to the biography of Xie Lingyun in the Song shu, where Pan Yue and Lu Ji are associated together as the finest of the Western Jin poets. See Shen Yue, comp., Song shu, 67.1778.
38. Yan Yanzhi 顏延之 (384–456) and Xie Lingyun 謝靈運 (385–433) represent here the
poets of the Liu Song. Again, their names are associated by Shen Yue in the postface to his biography of Xie Lingyun. The figure of embroidered sash and handkerchief is an allusion to Yang Xiong, who comments that, “The learning of the present age, not only does it employ florid diction, but, lacking restraint, it embroiders even sashes and handkerchiefs”
今之學也，非獨為之華藻也，又從而繡其鞶帨. See Fa yan yishu, 10.7.222.
39. The period from the founding of the Liu Song in 420 to the Yuanjia 元嘉 reign (424–
53) saw the presentation of the Hou Han shu, as well as the founding of state academies for Confucian scholarship, “Learning of the Dark” ( xuanxue 玄學), historical studies, and literary learning. On the academies, see Knechtges, “Culling the Weeds and Selecting Prime Blossoms,” p. 216.
40. The Daming 大明 reign (457–64) is not usually singled out as a period of great literary accomplishment, falling, as it did, between the Yuanjia reign, identified with the writers Bao Zhao 鮑照 (ca. 414–66), Xie Lingyun, and Yan Yanzhi, and the illustrious Yongming
永明 reign (483–94) of the Southern Qi dynasty. Zhong Rong 鐘嶸 (ca. 468–518) criti-
cized the literary works of this period as “practically the same as rote book-copying” 殆同
書抄. See Zhong Rong, Shi pin jizhu, 2.180.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
123
terms of its popularity. What seems to be the critical moment, rather, is the
fall of the Western Jin and the relocation of the court south of the Yangtze.
It is at this point that Pei once again takes up the problem of literary
embellishment, citing in particular the divorce of poetic practice from the
life of the court. The momentary restoration of normative values at the
beginning of the Song dynasty is again overtaken by the trend towards or-
nament. Pei tellingly constructs an opposition here between the love of
classical learning and historical scholarship ( jingshi 經史) and what
might be translated as “literary culture” ( siwen 斯文). The central prob-
lem is articulated as the emergence of a cultural vision based not on the
classical norms, but instead on purely literary values.
At this point, the moral poetics represented by the Classic of Poetry has
been utterly lost, and as a result, the age verges on the brink of ruin:
From this time on, among youths from village lanes and young men of highborn
leisure, all have abandoned the “Six Principles,” and instead chant and sing of
their innermost feelings. Students take figurative language as a pressing matter,
referring to textual commentary as narrow and dull.41 In their dissolute writings,
they break the canonical models and instead take superficial refinement as a mer-
itorious achievement.42 Nothing is set to pipes and strings; they do not stop at
the limits set by rites and morality.43 Their minds are deeply focused on grasses
and trees, and their most far-reaching interests extend only to wind and clouds.
Their deployment of allegorical signification is superficial and their aims weak,
[their works are] labored but without consequence and esoteric but without
profundity. Seeking back to its origins, there is indeed the lingering influence of
the Song dynasty.44 If Ji Zha were to hear its tones, he would not consider the
—————
41. The phrase boyi 博依, which I render as “figurative language,” comes from the “Record of Learning” 學記 chapter of the Li ji 禮記 ( Record of Ritual). Zheng Xuan glosses this as
“broad likenings” 廣譬喻也. See Zhu Bin 朱彬 (1753–1834), ed. and annot., Li ji xunzuan, 18.549.
42. The phrase feiran 斐然 is an allusion to Lunyu 5.21, in which Confucius laments how his disciples have mistaken refinement for true accomplishment. See Lunyu jishi, 10.343.
43. This is an allusion to the “Great Preface,” which, in describing the “changed” poetry of the Zhou’s decline, states, “Thus the changed airs were produced from feelings, but they stopped at the limits set by rites and morality. That they were produced from feelings was the nature of the people; that they stopped at the limits set by rites and morality was the grace of the former kings” 故變風發乎情，止乎禮義。發乎情，民之性也，止乎禮
義，先王之澤也. See Mao Shi zhengyi, 1.1.4a, in Shisanjing zhushu, p. 272.
44. The Wenyuan yinghua lacks the character yi 遺.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
124
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
tones those of a flourishing state.45 As for Li, who hastened across the chamber,
he would certainly not dare to do this.46 Xun Qing once said that the sign of a
chaotic age was that its literary writings were depraved and ornate.47 Is this not
what the present situation is approaching?
自是閭閻年少，貴游總角，罔不擯落六藝，吟詠情性。學者以博依為
急務，謂章句為專魯，淫文破典，斐爾為功。無被於管絃，非止乎禮
義，深心主卉木，遠致極風雲，其興浮，其志弱，巧而不要，隱而不
深，討其宗途，亦有宋之遺風也。若季子聆音，則非興國。鯉也趨
室，必有不敢。 荀卿有言：亂代之徵，文章匿而采。斯豈近之乎？
The tropes of the “Great Preface” have been replaced by a newly extrava-
gant language, one that would view “superficial refinement” ( fei’er 斐爾)
as superior to “canonical models” ( dian 典). The separation of poetry
from music is also significant, since it further emphasizes how poetic
composition no longer belongs to the sphere of courtly ritual, but has in-
stead become fixated on the truly insignificant, on the writing of poems
on “grasses and trees” ( huimu 卉木) and “wind and clouds” ( fengyun 風
雲). These are probably yongwu shi 詠物詩, “poems on things,” which
became popular during the Southern Dynasties. To speak of feng in this
regard is ironic, since the “moral influence” ( feng) of the king has now be-
come mere “wind” ( feng). In an age that celebrates poetic ornament and
finds its greatest achievements in the description of insignificant objects,
Pei sees the inevitable decline of dynastic fortune.
Li E’s Petition o
n Rectifying Literature
An even stronger objection to southern poetic style would be voiced by Li
E 李諤 (d. ca. 591), an influential censor in Sui Wendi’s court.48 Moreover,
unlike Pei’s discourse, Li E’s “Submitted Petition Regarding the Rectifica-
—————
45. This is another reference to the episode related in Zuo zhuan, Duke Xiang, 29th year.
See Chunqiu Zuo zhuan zhu, pp. 1162–64.
46. This is an allusion to the Lunyu, in which Confucius’ son, Li 鯉, style-name Boyu 伯
魚, was intercepted by the Master and questioned as to his studies. When asked whether he had studied the Poems, Li confessed that he had not. Confucius chastised him, and Li obediently retired to study the Poems. See Lunyu 16.13 / Lunyu jishi, 33.1168–69.
47. This is a reference to Xunzi’s “Discourse on Music” 樂論篇. However, when Xunzi
speaks of wenzhang, he means “pattern and ornament,” not “literature.” See Xunzi jijie, 14.20.385.
48. For his biography, see Sui shu, 66.1543–46; and Bei shi, 77.2613–16.
This content downloaded from 129.174.21.5 on Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:01:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Reception of Literature in Tang Taizong’s Court
125
tion of Literary Style” 上書正文體 would carry all the weight of the im-
perial censor’s position. Imperial court attention to the correction of lit-
erary trends seems to have been a northern dynastic interest, one that can
first be seen in the 545 edict by Yuwen Tai 宇文泰 (505/7–556).49 Yuwen
Tai’s edict was drafted by the scholar-official Su Chuo 蘇綽 (498–546),
who persuaded Yuwen Tai to bring about a literary reformation in the
context of a broader restoration of sagely rulership.50 However, whereas
Yuwen Tai and Su Chuo sought mainly to end the ornamental and flow-
ery writing that arose following the Jin dynasty, Li E took a much more
hard-line position. Li E begins with the following statement:
Your subject has heard that when the enlightened kings of antiquity transformed