A review of The
Original Analects by John Makeham, I have abridged this review - at places with the sign [ ], and divided it in 2 parts. After The Original Analects, John Makeham also reviews "The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation," by Roger T. Ames and Henry Rosemont, Jr. (1998). Few books-especially those already available in multiple translations-have the distinction of being translated four times within a two-year period. [Chichung Huang (1997), Simon Leys (1997).] The Lun yu, or Analects, is such a work. Of course, being a historical text, the Lun yu has been garnering commentary and interpretation for two thousand years. What distinguishes the two most recent translations-cum-studies of the Lun yu - the subjects of this review - is the effort the authors have made to move beyond the constraints of traditional interpretation. The first of these, The Original Analects: Sayings of Confucius and his Successors, by Bruce and Taeko Brooks, is the most exciting study of the Lun yu yet published in a Western language. Its potential implications are monumental, ranging from a rewriting of our understanding of Warring States texts and classical philosophy generally to major revisions in our understanding of early Confucianism and the nature of intellectual transmission in early China. The authors have been working on this and other Warring States (479-221 BC) texts for a quarter of a century, developing a sophisticated developmental chronology in which there emerges a pattern of intellectual interaction on a scale previously uncharted. Their findings have been honed as the result of the input and criticisms of an international network of scholars (largely based in the United States) who are affiliated with the Warring States Working Group Project (formally inaugurated in June 1993). The implications of their work to date demonstrate that the simplistic identification of a text with a single author and a single compositional date is, now more than ever, untenable. As for the Lun yu: it "contains only a core of sayings by the historical Confucius, to which have been added layers of attributed sayings and conversations invented by his successors to update their heritage, and to address the new needs of changing times" (p.vii). The theory used to explain how and why texts developed is an accretional theory, according to which texts represent the accumulated repository of changing advocacy positions of sponsoring groups over extended periods of time. The accretional growth of the Lun yu is further complicated by interpolational growth. In coming years, findings based on the application of the accretional theory to other Warring States texts will be published. As such, the study under review provides a test case for the appropriateness of this theory. This book is not for the faint-hearted. Here I am referring not to its profound iconoclastic and revisionist implications, but rather to the demands it places on the reader. One must pay undivided attention to its details if the many nuanced threads of argument (developed in the author's commentaries, reflections, and appendices) are to be pursued and appreciated. This requires carefully following up the multiple cross-references to other Lun yu passages and to the all important Appendix 1. Unlike other English translations, this is no tome to take to bed - unless you are well armed with the Harvard-Yenching concordance and an array of other translations and commentaries for comparative consultation. The translation follows the order of the chronology the authors propose for its accretional composition: Lun yu 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 3, 12, 13, 2, 14, 15, 1, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. This order is held to represent "a consecutive record of the elaboration of Confucius' thought, and its interaction with other modes of thought, from the time of his death to shortly before the founding of the Chin [Qin] empire" (p.1). Authors/compilers are identified for each chapter (pian), as are dates of composition, ranging from 479 BC to 249 BC. Of the total 530 passages (zhang) that the Brookses identify in the text (compared to the 501 in the Harvard-Yenching text), 142 passages are judged to be interpolations. These interpolations are all given a date of composition. Formal evidence for identifying the interpolations is presented in Appendix 1. Generally, each chapter includes some introductory remarks, a running commentary, identification of section divisions within the chapter, identification of paired sayings, and a concluding set of reflections. The provision of the inter-passage running commentary is especially welcome. At last the reader is provided with a context in which flesh is added to the very spare bones of the text. Appendix 1 sets out the accretional theory, in which the authors review earlier theories on the "evolutionary" nature of the text. Common to these other theories and the author's own theory is the identification of the chapter, either singly or in clusters, as the basic unit of accretion. The theoretical core of the book is presented in this appendix, and the more serious reader would be well advised to read it even before reading the translations. Here the formal criteria used for identifying paired sayings, interpolated passages, dating, and authorship are explained and defended. Appendix 2 identifies other developmental patterns in the Lun yu, the gist of the argument being that changes in the distribution of certain terms and ideas provide an independent set of criteria to confirm the authors' proposed chapter sequence because these changes could not have occurred "in the opposite direction" (p.257). Topics presented include those changes that evidence the gradual "aggrandizement" of Confucius, material and social developments, and conceptual and textual references. Appendix 3 provides a third set of criteria to confirm the developmental picture by identifying "historically meaningful conjunctions" (p.257) between the Lun yu and other Warring States texts: the Guan Zi, Mo Zi, and Zhuang Zi. Appendix 4 is a detailed and useful summary of information culled from early sources relating to Confucius, his disciples, and his ancestors and family successors. Appendix 5 presents chapters 1-4 in the received order, including interpolations, to show how this arrangement influences the way the reader will understand the text by privileging certain contents. In sum, the authors have constructed a powerful argument in which the Lun yu emerges not as the records of the school sayings of Confucius, but as a "history of early Confucianism" (p.1). The authors succeed admirably in reducing a welter of complex material into an orderly, accessible format. References are made to a wide range of sources: sinological, biblical, historical, scientific, and literary. The referencing system used in the body of the translation is economical and minimizes distraction. Physically, the book is handsomely produced, enhanced by a selection of black-and-white reproductions of early Chinese artifacts, characters are interspersed in the text (but the original text of the Lun yu is not reproduced). Typographical and editing errors are few. The translations are generally competent, and the interpretations are frequently original. [ ] The real meat of the book, however, lies not in its contribution to translation, but in the structuring that is identified as the framework for the accretional theory. If any single feature of the Brookses' study were to be singled out as the most significant it must surely be the identification of this structuring. Yet it is also this same feature that undermines the accretional theory in its proposed form. Given the implications of this theory - not only for our understanding of Confucius, the Lun yu, and early Confucian traditions but also for our understanding of early Chinese thought in general - it must be subjected to the closest scrutiny; the authors would readily concur. A review article is not the appropriate forum to conduct such a project; nevertheless, even a limited examination of the arguments underpinning this theory reveals problems. In what follows I am going to assume the role of the devil's advocate. In posing counterarguments my purpose is not to discredit the view that the Lun yu is composite or accretional. Rather, my aim is to question whether the structures identified by the authors and which support their particular accretional model are, in fact, persuasive. Different readers will read the text differently and will by no means agree with all of the points I make. If, however, even only a reasonable proportion of the criticisms I make are valid, then it seems that the theory, as it stands, is brilliant, but unpersuasive. Put in more dramatic terms, just as the author's tight-knit theoretical structure lends their interpretation such strength, so, too, the vulnerability of that same structure to even minimal recalibration exposes its greatest weakness: if even a few links are removed, the entire edifice threatens to collapse. The authors are well aware of this - hence Appendixes 2 and 3. Yet even these rely on the foundational support of the accretional theory argued in Appendix 1. It is at this point that I must beg the reader's indulgence, for to follow my argument adequately will require access to both the Harvard-Yenching concordance and the book under review. The second requirement is, of course, all the more reason for readers to purchase a copy of the book if they have not already done so. The following examination is limited to the first five chapters of the reconstructed text, this sample being sufficient to identify structural deficiencies that are generic to the authors' overall thesis regarding the text. The authors propose a three-tiered structure of the Lun yu text: (1) that pairing of sayings "characterizes the entire text." (2) "Complementing the paring principle is the section principle: pairs of sayings (sometimes ending with a single unpaired saying) tend to be arranged in sections with a thematic or other coherent identity... As far as we know, we are the first to propose that sectioning, like the pairing of sayings, is a pervasive structural device in the Analects" (p. 207). (3) Nearly all chapters are composed of 24 passages. It is these three structural elements that lend the accretional theory tremendous intuitive appeal, as they seem to provide a solid frame from which to gauge compatibility and deviation. Pairing and sections
|