Click here for the introduction to Round and Square's series on remonstrance.
We continue our study of remonstrance with a series of posts that grew out of my participation in the Tenth East-West Philosophers Conference in Honolulu in May 2011. The theme was “Business Practice in a Global World,” and it was an exhilarating ten days of discussion and contention with philosophers, administrators, and entrepreneurs. My own work there centered on remonstrance, and my specific task was to convey the richness of the concept to philosophers, on the one had, and practicing business people, on the other. The next dozen or so posts under this “remonstrance” header will deal with that material.
We continue our study of remonstrance with a series of posts that grew out of my participation in the Tenth East-West Philosophers Conference in Honolulu in May 2011. The theme was “Business Practice in a Global World,” and it was an exhilarating ten days of discussion and contention with philosophers, administrators, and entrepreneurs. My own work there centered on remonstrance, and my specific task was to convey the richness of the concept to philosophers, on the one had, and practicing business people, on the other. The next dozen or so posts under this “remonstrance” header will deal with that material.
 |
| [a] Unwavering RF |
Although it may seem to be an esoteric topic, it is very far from it. In East Asia and the West, it lies at the heart of administrative practice and a great deal of public life. It is a social dynamic with powerful implications for the political order, and it has figured, just in the past few years in events ranging from the world financial crisis to critiques of domestic policy across the globe. The spirit of remonstrance is social and public, and that is precisely why those who wish to admonish think twice or thrice…and those in power fear it.
Remonstrance 1 Remonstrance 2 Remonstrance 3
Remonstrance 4 Remonstrance 5 Remonstrance 6
Remonstrance 7 Remonstrance 8 Remonstrance 9
Remonstrance (8)—Critical History
After examining classical models and interpretations of remonstrance, it is necessary to open the question as far as possible to the way that it played out throughout Chinese history. All of our examples to this point have been “fictional,” in one way or another, from King Lear to Marcel Granet’s "social-sinological" imagination. We will now examine the single longest sustained narrative of Chinese history written during the imperial period—Sima Guang’s Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government (1085). Readers of Round and Square already know it well as the key text behind our series of posts called “Breaking the Vessel.”
Even though the Comprehensive Mirror is a patchwork of quoted materials—the words of numerous scholars over a period of 1,362 years—it contains a remarkably consistent set of themes and images. The most prominent of these, as I have argued elsewhere, is the ideal of remonstrance, which runs as a continuous thread through the Mirror’s narrative as a voice of literati morality, couched in classical precept and historical example, imploring sovereigns toward virtuous conduct and practical results.[1] I have called its contents A Rhetoric of Remonstrance, and I stand by the phrase, even though I cannot begin to discuss all of the reasons behind it in this paper.
Unlike the slightly more than one hundred commentaries he himself composed for the text (which is 10,000 pages long in the definitive Zhonghua shuju edition), directly quoted memorials in the Comprehensive Mirror are both abundant and rhetorically rich, often taking up many pages of text. Used in political discourse, remonstrance was the implementation of historical and classical precepts in contemporary political argument. Sima Guang himself wrote in a Comprehensive Mirror commentary:
Mistakes are that which people can certainly not avoid; only a sage is able to know and correct them. Antiquity’s sage kings feared having errors and not themselves perceiving them—therefore they established critique boards and erected remonstrance drums. How indeed could they be fearful of the people’s hearing of their failings![2]
If we focus on the complex “narrative” of the work, the emperor bore absolute power within the Comprehensive Mirror’s Middle Kingdom, but exercised it through the “legs and arms” that were his ministers. He bore responsibility for their actions, but so, too, did he benefit from good government implemented by competent ministers. It was the capable official who held the key to good government in the Comprehensive Mirror. The text’s opening commentary, which appears after a single line of text, is instructive:
King Lie of Wei, twenty-third year (403 BCE). For the first time, it was decreed that the daifu of Jin—Wei Si, Zhao Ji, and Han Qian—be made zhuhou.
Your servant, Guang, observes:
 |
| [b] Fortune RF |
The superior governing the inferior is like the vital organs controlling the hands and feet, or roots and trunk regulating branches and leaves. The inferior serving the superior is like hands and feet protecting the vital organs, and branches and leaves guarding the roots and trunk—only then can superior and inferior protect each other, and the state be ordered and peaceful.[3]
In this textual scheme, social harmony and correct conduct were only possible in a government run by officials who closely approached these ideals; proper government was the government of sages. More than occasionally, the “answer” seems a bit too neat. Quoting, in a perfect example of the Comprehensive Mirror’s richly layered vocality, with one historical reflection on top of another, the “lessons” of Han’s fall are revealed:
Staying near to the influence of sagely ministers and keeping distance from
petty people—this is how the Former Han prospered. Staying near to the
influence of petty people and keeping distance from sagely ministers—this is
how the Later Han fell. At that time, the former emperor discussed these affairs
with me. Never once did he not let out a pained sigh when discussing Huan
and Ling.[4]
petty people—this is how the Former Han prospered. Staying near to the
influence of petty people and keeping distance from sagely ministers—this is
how the Later Han fell. At that time, the former emperor discussed these affairs
with me. Never once did he not let out a pained sigh when discussing Huan
and Ling.[4]
Coupled with the ideal of remonstrance was a bond of loyalty connecting high and low. Loyalty, in the multivocal rhetoric of the Comprehensive Mirror, was not merely a matter of blind obedience. However strong the obedience shown toward a powerful superior may have made the social fabric, the long-term effect was debilitating. The ultimate role of remonstrance was to warn, even to leave office or accept the deepest of punishments, not to deeply disturb the status quo.
The historian, however, could have his (or her, since there is precedent) voice in these matters, and Sima’s message is clear in his long and articulate assessment of the Han dynasty’s fall. Consider it a kind of historiographical remonstrance that interprets the past but speaks, as well, to the present and future. It is a long quotation, but it is worth your time. Ponder it. Even if you do not know the particulars (and unless you worked hard in Chinese high school, you don’t), it will be understandable. The specific situations are particular to China in the third century of the Common Era; the larger context is transferable to many situations in world history, whether or not you agree with Sima Guang’s interpretation. It is worth quoting at length, because it opens an entire world of traditional interpretation about just how badly things can go wrong.
Your servant, Guang, observes:
Instruction is the state’s urgent affair, yet coarse officials slight it; culture is all under heaven’s great enterprise, yet mean rulers neglect it. Only perceptive rulers, with deep discernment and foresight, later realize the greatness of increase and the perpetuity of benefit. Guangwu encountered mid-Han decline, the numerous heroes [of the age] boiling like broth. He vigorously rose from the common people, joined the threads of the great past, waged war in the four quarters, and took no daily leisure. However, he could still esteem classical learning—he invited scholars, opened schools, and restored and clarified rites and music. His military accomplishments were complete, his civil virtue harmonious.
Continuing this, Xiaoming and Xiaozhang sought after earlier principles...This was on account of instruction established above, culture perfected below. Loyal generous, enlightened, and cultured scholars among them not only garnered respect from court officials, but were admired by the masses as well. Stupid, vile, filthy, and corrupt men not only were denied access to court, but were shunned in country villages as well. Since the destruction of the Three Dynasties, the splendor of culture never was like that of Eastern Han’s flourishing. From Xiaohe on down, imperial relatives arrogated power, favorites and sycophants manipulated affairs, rewards and punishments were unregulated, bribery and corruption publicly transacted, virtuous and stupid lumped together, right and wrong turned upside down—this can be called disorder...
Unfortunately, the inherited excesses of decay and ruin were intensified by Huan and Ling’s benighted cruelty; (they) protected and nourished the perverse more than flesh and blood, and exterminated the loyal and kind more than brigands and rebels—increasing the shi’s anger, accumulating rage within the four seas. Thereupon He Jin called men to arms and Dong Zhuo took advantage of discord; men like Yuan Shao followed suit and created disorder, thereupon causing [imperial] carriages to wander aimlessly. Imperial temples, burial sites, and imperial houses were destroyed and overturned; the people muddied and blackened, the great mandate had fallen and broken, unable to be revived.
[1] Robert André LaFleur, “A Rhetoric of Remonstrance: History, Commentary, and Historical Imagination in Sima Guang’s Zizhi tongjian.” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1996.
[2] Zizhi Tongjian [資治通鑑; Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government]. Zhonghua Shuju, [12] 416.
[3] Zizhi tongjian [1], 2.
[5] Zizhi tongjian [68], 2173–2174.
Bibliography
LaFleur, Robert André. "A Rhetoric of Remonstrance: History, Commentary, and Historical Imagination in Sima Guang's Zizhi tongjian." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1996.
Sima Guang. Zizhi Tongjian [資治通鑑; Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government]. Zhonghua Shuju, 1956.
Bibliography
LaFleur, Robert André. "A Rhetoric of Remonstrance: History, Commentary, and Historical Imagination in Sima Guang's Zizhi tongjian." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1996.
Sima Guang. Zizhi Tongjian [資治通鑑; Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government]. Zhonghua Shuju, 1956.
No comments:
Post a Comment