Han Yü’s Chin-hsüeh chieh: A Rhapsody on Higher Learning

Abstract

Tang Studk. 4 (1986) Han Vu's Chin-hsiieh ehieh: A Rhapsody on Higher Learning MADELINE K. SPRING UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, BOULDER Although traditional and modern critics agree on the importance of Chin-hsiieh chieh ~ ~ W? and often cite it as an example of Han Yli's wit and genius, categorization of this work is by no means uniform. In most collections of Han Yli's works it is simply listed under ttMiscellaneous Writings" (tsa-chu «rf W).l In the standard Ch'ing anthology Ku-wen kuan-chih t!J 3t 1m Jl: it is placed between two of Han Yli's well-known prose works, his Shih shuo Mi m (Allocution on Teaching) and his Wu-che Wang Ch engfu chuan .pj ~ J: *ifilj\ if. (The Biography of Wang Ch'eng-fu, the Plasterer).2 Such decisions by anthologizers frequently also determine the fate of a literary work as it appears in translation. For example, Georges Margoulies, who translates a number of selections from Ku-wen kuan-chih, also includes Chin-hsiieh chieh between the two above- mentioned essays.3 However, such ISee, for example, Han Ch 'ang-li chi ¥$ ~ ~ ~ [hereafter HCLC] (rpt., Taipei, 1975),I, 25-27; Han Yu wen ¥$ il\ 3t, annot. Chuang Shih JtEii and Tsang Li-ho aIb A (rpt., Taipei, 1979),23-28;Han Ch 'ang-li ch 'uan-chi ¥$ ~ ~ ~ ~ (SSP¥). I would like to thank Paul W.Kroll for his helpful comments and suggestions on this article. 2Ku-wen kuan-chih, ed. Wu Ch'eng-eh'iian ~ ~ fI (fl.1711) et al.; collated by WangWen-ju .I3t~iI (Taipei, 1978),8.3-7. 3Georges Margoulies, Le Kou-wen chinois (Paris, 1926),190-194.Margoulies elsewhere discusses "Chin-hsiieh chieh" in terms of its autobiographical nature, but makes no mention of its prosodic form. He does, however, talk of Han Yii's fu, but these comments are limited to four pieces that actually have the word fu in their titles. [HCLC, 1.1-7]. After making some general remarks on the decline of the fu genre by the time of the T'ang, Margoulies harshly criticizes Han Yii's fu as follows: ••...en tant que qualite its ne presentent rien ni de bien original ni de bien remarquable; leur valeur artistique n'est pas tras, tras grande." (Margoulias, Evolution de la prose artistique chinoise [Miinchen, 1929], 179). Later (p. 182) he concludes that Han Yii was simply not well-suited to that genre. 11 Han Yi.i's Chin-hsiieh chieh: A Rhapsody on Higher Learning MADELINEK. SPRING UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, BOULDER Ta噓! Studies 4 (1986) Although traditional and modern critics agree on the importance of Chin-hsiieh chieh 進學解 and often cite it as an example of Han Yii's wit and genius, categorization of this work is by no means uniform. In most collections of Han Yii's works it is simply listed under "Miscellaneous Writings" (tsa-chu 雜著）.1 In the standard Ch'ing anthology Ku-wen kuan-chih 古文觀止 it is placed between two of Han Yu's well-known prose works, his Shih shuo 師說 (Allocution on Teaching) and his Wu-che Wang Chengfu chuan 话者王承幅傳 (The Biography of Wang Ch'eng-fu, the Plasterer).2 Such decisions by anthologizers frequently also determine the fate of a literary work as it appears in translation. For example, Georges Margoul誌s, who translates a number of selections from Ku-wen kuan-chih, also includes Chin-hsiieh chieh between the two above- mentioned essays.3 However, such lSee, for example, Han Chang-li chi 韓昌黎集 [hereafter HCLCJ (rpt., Taipei, 1975),I, 25-27;Han Yii wen 韓愈文， annot. Chuang Shih 莊適 and Tsang Li-ho 藏勵人 (rpt., Taipei, 1979),23-28;Han Chang-li ch'iian-chi 韓 昌黎全集 (SSPY). I would like to thank Paul W.Kroll for his helpful comments and suggestions on this article. 2Ku-wenkuan-chih, ed. Wu Ch'eng-ch'iian 吳乘懽 (fl.1711) et al.; collated by Wang Wen-ju 王文濡 (Taipei, 1978),8.3-7. 3GeorgesMargoulies, Le Kou-wen chinois (Paris, 1926), 190-194. Margoulies elsewhere discusses "Chin-hsileh chieh" in terms of its autobiographical nature, but makes no mention of its prosodic form. He does, however, talk of Han Yil's fu, but these comments are...