Heartthrob’s Barbed Blog Challenges China’s Leaders:
Since he began blogging in 2006, Mr. Han has been delivering increasingly caustic attacks on China’s leadership and the policies he contends are creating misery for those unlucky enough to lack a powerful government post. With more than 300 million hits to his blog, he may be the most popular living writer in the world.
In a recent interview at his office in Shanghai, he described party officials as “useless” and prone to spouting nonsense, although he used more delicate language to dismiss their relevance. “Their lives are nothing like ours,” he said. “The only thing they have in common with young people is that like us, they too have girlfriends in their 20s, although theirs are on the side.”
It looks like internet usage in China may be reaching 400 million soon. This may seem a bit of a stretch, but I wonder if someone such as Han Han might be viewed as an heir to the long tradition of Confucian scholars who serve as outsider critics against Imperial regimes they deemed morally unfit.
Comments Off on How the outsider looks
Reading An Introduction to Confucianism, which is not the typical historically linear treatment (i.e., Confucius → Han dynasty State Confucianism → Song dynasty Neo-Confucianism, etc.), and is also more comprehensive than most introductions (it’s over 350 pages). In case, the author notes that before the Han dynasty Confucianism was simply one of many contesting schools. It was during the reign of Hanwudi that Confucianism was integrated into the administrative ideological apparatus of the unified Chinese state, resulting in State Confucianism. It is famously known that the Legalist school, which was brought to preeminence by the students of the Confucian sage with the most “tragic vision,” Xunzi, attempted to expunge Confucianism during the Chin dynasty. The Chin dynasty is reviled throughout most of Chinese history (with the Maoists being an interesting exception) for its espousal of Legalism and rejection of the humanistic ethos at the heart of Confucianism, but, it is also acknowledged by modern scholars to have set the foundations for the dynastic system which fostered a resurrection of a unified Chinese imperial state after every political collapse. The Chin united China in a manner which set the template for all of Chinese history; by comparison, the Zhou dynasty which the early Confucians idolized was a primitive and feudal polity.
Many modern scholars would argue that the practical structural scaffolding of the Chinese state between the Chin and the early 20th century, a span of over 2,000 years, owed much to Legalism, even if the symbolic ideological core of the state was generally Confucian. And yet I can not help but wonder if China would ever have been unified, and its local identities subordinated to the center, if not for the blitzkrieg which was the Chin Legalist state. Like Stalinist Russia or Maoist China it seems likely that the Legalist phase had a “sell-by” date, the Chin dynasty collapsed almost immediately after the death of the First Emperor. A China where Confucian ideology marginalized Legalism early enough may have been one where China, like India or Europe, developed into a civilization of states, instead of a state which was coterminous with the civilization. State Confucianism may never have developed, and become entrenched as the foundational ethos of the bureaucratically oriented literati. The Confucian Age in China may have been an ancient period before the rise of Buddhist monarchies.
Addendum: Also recommended, The Early Chinese Empires: Qin and Han.
Comments Off on Historical contingencies of civilizational ideologies
I noticed that a new biopic of Confucius just opened in China. It’s pretty obvious that they “sexed up” his life, as you can see in the trailer. In terms of a big-budget biopic it seems to me that the life of Confucius is a very thin source of blockbuster material in relation to other social-religious figures of eminence. Jesus, Moses and Buddha have supernatural aspects to their lives. Muhammad’s life offers the opportunity for set-piece battles. Confucius was in many ways a failed bureaucrat, a genius unrecognized in his own day. His life can’t be easily appreciated unless you have the proper context of his impact on Chinese history in mind. Stepping into it without a grand frame can lead one to conclude that he was quite a pedestrian man. Confucius was a man of ideas (though even those ideas can seem somewhat obscure, e.g. rectification of names). You see this in Annping Chin’s The Authentic Confucius: A Life of Thought and Politics; I can’t imagine Karen Armstrong writing such a dense and slow book.
Comments Off on Confucius biopic