Talk:Chinese literature

Do we need the << >> symbols?

Really hard to read something like that

《三国演义》 (The Romance of the Three Kingdoms) by Luo Guanzhong (罗贯中 luo2 guan4 zhong1)

• Are those 《 》 necessary ? I think that they are usefull in a Chinese text were some ambiguities occur with titles. But here the reader know that it is a name of a book, no ?

• I would really love a bot to change those numbers meng2 ma4 to tones méng mà"

Include/don't include

Amy DeMattei and Maxine Kingston are not Chinese. I do not think that they should be included in a discussion of Chinese Litteratre alongside Chinese authors.

I believe that Confucius (Kong zi) should be mentioned along with Zhuang zi, Meng zi, etc. He is, after all, believed to be more prominent.

Searching for a Qing Dynasty author

I am writing a page on Jow Tong, the archery teacher of Yue Fei. Now Yue Fei has a fictional wuxia novel called Telling the Complete Biography of Yue Fei and the original was written by Qian Cai (Chinese: 钱彩) during the Qing Dynasty. I know of there being a second edition written during the late Qing Dynasty by another person, but I don’t know their name.

I recently came across the following page that describes Yue Fei’s biography:

The Complete Story of Yue Fei was written by Qian Cai and Jin Feng based on all kinds of legends about Yue Fei. Yue Fei was the major character in the novel. He was a national hero and patriotic general, but he was, at the same time, stubbornly loyal to the incompetent government. Negative characters such as Wu Zhu and the Qin Hui couple were also vividly portrayed. Feudal society was in a gradual decline in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties. Discussions about love, marriage and codes of ethics were the major subjects in fiction of this period. The Marriage that Awakes the World belonged to this category. It described the entanglement of marriages between two families engaged in a blood feud. The novel vividly portrayed a host of characters from different social classes, profoundly revealing the seamy side of social reality and acutely reflecting the rise of mercantile forecast the end of feudal society. This was a long novel of more than 1 million Chinese characters. [1]

The copy of the Complete Story of Yue Fei I have only mentions Qian Cai. Who is this Jin Feng author? Is he the author of the second edition? What else has he written besides this fictional biography? (Ghostexorcist 04:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

Additions

I recently added Shen Kuo and Su Song to the list of contributors, noting their scientific/technological bent. --PericlesofAthens 15:52, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I just added the new section and info on Chinese historiography.--PericlesofAthens 01:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I expanded the History text section to include large Chinese encyclopedias written over the ages.--PericlesofAthens 00:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Art of War?

No mention of this classic? That seems an oversight. I'd put it in myself but I don't feel knowledgeable enough.

However that work is not considered "literature." Philipmerrill (talk) 05:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Drama?

I added some pre-20th century drama titles that are mentioned elsewhere in Wikipedia, but had to post the list under the "novels" section -- is that the best place to put it?

Aristophanes68 21:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Themes

It would be great for this article to contain a summary and analysis of the major THEMES in Chinese literature. Do we have any experts who can handle this task? --Cantaire87 21:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Does it include....

Bold text

Does this include the the alphabet in chinese, maybe the many alphabets in chinese? Does the chinese alphabet actually have thousands of characters? Could anyone who knows this answer, please e-mail it to me at affieet@gmail.com. This information is for a school project (I'm in 6th grade)

Thank you Afreenat —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afreenat (talk • contribs) 20:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

New category, need articles

I have created a subcategory for Category:Stock characters by characteristics called Category:Fictional elderly martial arts masters. I'm sure there are some people on here that know of some articles that can fit into this category. Thanks. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletions

I removed "Chinese writers on the mainland felt Gao did not authentically represent China." A subjective assertion with no citation regarding Gao Xingjian's receipt of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2000.

cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PROVEIT#Burden_of_evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.236.89.143 (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

New Material

Hello all! my name is Amber and I'm doing an article for a class requirement. The piece that I initially composed for our group project - literature and feminism- does not fit with the rest of the article and I thought it made a lot of sense to place it here in this article. I made some adjustments to the content so that it would fit with the flow. Please feel free to make any changes to better suit you all and leave me some feed back on what you think about the additions on my talk page. Thanks You! Ajr36 (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Dates: BCE/CE or BC/AD?

I see that both BCE and BC are being used in the article; per the MOS, it should be one or the other. Has this issue been addressed already? If not, I suggest using BCE/CE throughout, since they're more neutral (i.e., not specifically Christian) and therefore more appropriate than BC/AD. Thoughts? Aristophanes68 (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree that BCE and CE should be used. --Darktower 12345 00:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I notice that the Han Dynasty article, which covers both BCE and CE, has already made the switch. Aristophanes68 (talk) 05:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese poetry Jan. 2012 revision

Because I dare to replace the chunk that's there with a new passage (that I spent a few months writing and reviewed with an expert), it's important to me to preserve what was here previously. It has problems, yet it's short, but I tried to base my revision on its general approach and want to preserve its exact language in case anyone thinks I did it an injustice:

---

Along with the earlier Shijing, or Classic of Poetry, one of the earliest and most influential poetic anthologies was the Chuci (楚辭，楚辞) (Songs of the South), made up primarily of poems ascribed to the semi-legendary Qu Yuan (屈原) (c. 340-278 BCE) and his follower Song Yu (宋玉) (4th century BCE). The songs in this collection are lyrical and romantic and represent a different tradition from the earlier Shijing. During the Han Dynasty (206 BCE-CE 220), this form evolved into the fu (賦，赋) , a poem usually in rhymed verse except for introductory and concluding passages that are in prose, often in the form of questions and answers. The era of disunity that followed the Han period saw the rise of romantic nature poetry, which was heavily influenced by Taoism. The Han Chinese astronomer, mathematician, and inventor Zhang Heng (78–139 CE) was also largely responsible for the early development of Shi (詩，诗) poetry.

Classical poetry reached its zenith during the Tang Dynasty (CE 618–907), and thus this type of poetry is known as Tang poetry. The early Tang period was best known for its lushi 律诗 (regulated verse), an eight-line poem with five or seven words in each line; Zi (verse following strict rules of prosody); and jueju （绝句）(truncated verse), a four-line poem with five or seven words in each line. The two best-known poets of the period were Li Bai (701–762) and Du Fu (712–770). Li Bai was known for the romanticism of his poetry; Du Fu was seen as a Confucian moralist with a strict sense of duty toward society. Later Tang poets developed greater realism and social criticism and refined the art of narration. Among the best-known of the later Tang poets was Bai Juyi (772–846), whose poems were a critical commentary on the society of his time. Li Yun (789–831) was an eclectic poet, writing mainly "Palace poetry". The Quantangshi, or complete Tang Poems (全唐詩) was not fully compiled until 1705 CE, during the Qing Dynasty.

Subsequent writers of classical poetry lived under the shadow of their Tang predecessors, and although there were many poets in subsequent dynasties, none reached the level of this period. As the classical style of poetry became more stultified, a more flexible poetic medium, the ci (詞，词), arrived on the scene. The ci, a poetic form based on the tunes of popular songs, some of which were of Central Asian origin, was developed to its fullest by the poets of the Song Dynasty (960–1279 CE). The Song era poet Su Shi (1037–1101 CE) mastered the ci, shi, and fu forms of poetry, as well as prose, calligraphy, and painting.

As the ci gradually became more literary and artificial, Sanqu, a more free form based on dramatic arias, developed. The use of sanqu songs in drama marked an important step in the development of vernacular literature.

---

The problems include: So much attention on Chuci but underrepresentation of Classic of Poetry; I love Chinese characters but this is introductory and their use is not consistent; the claims about Zhang Heng are really offbeat as far as contemporary academic writing on the subject; the use of "zenith" for Tang poetry buys into one side of a debate I refer to in my revision; the reference to the "Zi" form is almost certainly a chimera caused by Wade-Giles romanization (it most likely refers to Ci, albeit that a Zi Ye style existed pre-Tang that doesn't fit the description); as for the reference to the collection of Tang poems I've left this out - it's not a problem but it's also a side point and collections can be addressed more directly on other Chinese poetry pages about collections (we have these!). I note an improved reference to Sanqu which included a misstatement when I began this project (thanks). Anyway, I hope my revision is seen as POSITIVE and I'm happy to help other editors making it better (or sit back happily while they do so). Philipmerrill (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Other Languages

What about other languages. Tibetan for instance. Would they not come under literature from China as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.132.197 (talk) 15:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

They should go under the article Tibetan literature as this is Chinese language literature, as in Chinese script. --Cold Season (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Chinese literature

http://books.google.com/books?id=KZ0lJDL_1nsC&pg=PA320&lpg=PA320&dq=Miao+++colloquial&source=bl&ots=bHtiBue9lW&sig=m7KqlIksiIdPIXK5h-DPjGgvmlE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=E6F7UMnUHc2I0QHtkoEY&ved=0CGoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Miao%20%20%20colloquial&f=false

05:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghressho (talk • contribs)

Qing dynasty literature

http://books.google.com/books?id=ERY6AQAAIAAJ&pg=PR11&dq=thousand+character+classic+manchu&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RhCoUOSZGunm0gHZhYGgBQ&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=thousand%20character%20classic%20manchu&f=false

Jerezembel (talk) 22:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

List of Qing dynasty literature in chinese and manchu languages compiled by the Royal Asiatic Society

http://books.google.com/books?id=saJDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA24#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=LVkDAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA24#v=onepage&q&f=false

The list includes the names of the titles in chinese characters and romanized manchu.

Rajmaan (talk) 21:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Manchu literature article?

Thanks once more to Rajmaan for his work, particularly adding the item on Manchu literature. This addition suggests that Manchu literature is an important topic which deserves its own article. I am not qualified to write anything extensive, but someone, perhaps Rajmaan or would start at least a stub, to which I would be glad to add a few bits and pieces, such as the Treasures of the Yenching and Chuimei Ho's Splendors of the Forbidden City, both of which have some material. ch (talk) 15:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3217747?seq=4

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2719468

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/23351361

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4130134

Rajmaan (talk) 22:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Here are the articles above in Wikipedia citation form

• Crossley, Pamela Kyle and Evelyn S. Rawski (1993). "A Profile of the Manchu Language in Ch'ing History". Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies. 53 (1): 63–102. JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/2719468. {{cite journal}}: Check |jstor= value (help); External link in |jstor= (help)
• Norman, Jerry (2003). "The Manchus and Their Language (Presidential Address)". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 123 (3): 483–491. JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/3217747. {{cite journal}}: Check |jstor= value (help); External link in |jstor= (help)
• Hanson, Marta (2003). "The "Golden Mirror" in the Imperial Court of the Qianlong Emperor, 1739-1742". Early Science and Medicine. 8 (2): 111–147. JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/4130134. {{cite journal}}: Check |jstor= value (help); External link in |jstor= (help)
• Durrant, Stephen (1977). "Manchu Translations of Chou Dynasty Texts". Early China. 3: 52–54. JSTOR http://www.jstor.org/stable/23351361. {{cite journal}}: Check |jstor= value (help); External link in |jstor= (help)

ch (talk) 04:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. Manchu literature.

Rajmaan (talk) 06:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

This article should take a more chronological approach

Per WP:NOTJOURNAL, we should not be assuming our English-speaking readers already know what "classical literature" and "modern literature" are, and we probably shouldn't expect them to click on the wikilinks and read the (often not immediately clear) leads of the other article to find out when a particular work was written or when a particular person lived. Most books I have consulted on the topic of "Chinese literature" don't break the chronology down into simply "classical" and "modern", and while they do have sections on genres, they have those sections within broader chapters on, say, pre-Qin literature, literature of the Tang dynasty, and so on.

We should firmly define (in the lead) what the breakdown between "classical" and "modern" is about. The closest the article comes to this now is saying In this sense, late Qing fiction is modern. This is also technically inaccurate if we are contrasting "modern Chinese literature" to "classical Chinese literature", and if by "classical Chinese literature" we mean "classical Chinese literature"; that distinction is not strictly chronological. I don't know enough about the topic to say for definite, but were there really no vernacular works composed before the end of the Qing dynasty?

We should also have the entire article broken down in to sections based on periods (not literary genres or forms). Dynasties work fine for me, but I'm not sure about further breakdowns (most of the Japanese sources I have consulted on Chinese poetry like to break the Tang dynasty down into smaller chunks like 初唐 and 盛唐).

What do others think?

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

In all honesty, I have been avoiding this article for years simply because rewriting/reworking it will be such a daunting task; I then realized, however, that it's not necessarily daunting, but rather just large, since there are now quite a few good sources on Chinese literature that we could take as our guide, especially the Cambridge History set from 2010.

That being said, I'm not sure that a purely chronological approach is the most appropriate here. I foresee a "types"-based approach being better here, except for a "History" subsection that itself will probably be a truncated version of a separate "History of Chinese literature" page (this is what happened at Fu (poetry)). I also suspect that this article will have real WP:LENGTH problems if we aren't very disciplined in our writing.  White Whirlwind  咨  05:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to remove lists of writers; possibly to a list page

Unless there is objection, after a week or so, I will move the lists of poets, prose writers, and modern writers, possibly creating a list page or maybe add to a category, if I can do it without a lot of trouble.

The reason is that they take up a lot of space, they are not used in the articles on other national literatures, and are not necessay, since they should be covered in a category. ch (talk) 22:40, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

@CWH, I agree with you that this is a good idea. JArthur1984 (talk) 14:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that improvement of lists for Chinese literature can be done in the right way, without going to some trouble. Maybe not too much trouble! Fortunately enough, some work has already been done in this area. For example, there is already an existing article List of Chinese-language poets. It should be easy enough to go through and make sure that list from the "Chinese literature" is properly merged into that. Similarly for the "8 Great" Tang and Song "masters". The "Classic Chinese Novels" article also has a list. There is also an existing List of Chinese writers. I agree that from an architecturally encyclopedic perspective that the somewhat extensive lists embedded in the "Chinese literature" article should for the most part be handled in subsidiary articles. However, I would encourage the maintenance and development of lists, or as I guess we seem to be thinking now, as lists of lists. A pertinent discussion of this can be seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of poems in Chinese or by Chinese poets. So, I do not see that cleaning up the "Chinese literature" article should be "too much trouble", especially if leveraging the existing list structures. Happy editing! Dcattell (talk) 18:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)