March 18, 2010

Chinese calligraphy by some of the most well-known artists in Hong Kong including Mr Fong Chi-yung, Mr Ng Ko-shek, Mr Chan Mong-biu and Mr Hui Shuet-ming is now on display at the exhibition ‘Arts of the Chinese Brush: Exhibition of Calligraphy by Invited Artists’.

Shufa 書法, originally defined as ‘the rules to write Han characters’, has been a form of art since ancient times and remains popular in the present day. Also for those without knowledge of Chinese, the exhibition is worth a visit as the masterpieces are simply works of art.

The exhibition runs from 13 March to 25 April 2010. For more details please see the announcement on the CCIV website.

Written by: Audrey

March 15, 2010

I recently read an article on Chinese cannons and their modern applications by Jeremy Paltiel (”Mencius and World Order Theories” The Chinese Journal of International Politics, Vol. 3, 2010, pp. 37-54), which gave me a lot of thoughts.

“Pre-Qin China,” Paltiel argues, ”is both a rich source of data for international relations specialists and a rich source of analytical insight” because of “an independently authored set of historical texts [the work of Han Fei, Mo Di, Mencius etc.] that lay out the narrative of inter-state relations in ways that allow us to independently evaluate the relationship of data to interpretation and analysis” which allow researchers “to place modern scientific analytic frames around the interpretive propositions of pre-Qin thinkers, and independently evaluate the data in that light.”

Researchers, he suggests, “should look at the reframed ancient wisdom and ask whether or how this wisdom allows us to fill out or expand the frame of our scientific knowledge and how this new synthesis allow us better to interpret data.” (p. 37-8) Drawing on this theoretical framework, Paltiel examines Mencius’’s theory of hegemony (Badao 霸道) and the kingly way (Wangdao 王道), and their implications in modern international relations theory and its relevance to contemporary international conflict such as the American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and contemporary Chinese foreign policy (very briefly and superficially though).

For students who are taking our GE course: Chinese Cultural Cannons and their Modern Applications, have a look of this article. It won”t disappoint you.

Written by: hoito

March 2, 2010

Following up on my last entry, among the sinologists who never set foot in China is Arthur Waley (1889-1966). During his long life he published many fine translations of both Chinese and Japanese literature. However, as Jonathan Spence writes in his article “The Explorer Who Never Left Home—Arthur Waley”: ”Waley never even visited either of the countries that gave him such inspiration.” (Renditions 5: 1976)  As Spence continues: “One can make all kinds of guesses concerning Waley’s reasons for not going to Asia: that he didn’t want to confuse the ideal with the real, or that he was interested in the ancient written languages and not the spoken ones, or that he simply couldn’t afford the journey.” Whatever the reason, I think Waley is rather an exception. But not the only one. As a matter of fact, one of my lecturers at Leiden has never been to China either. Lecturing in classical Chinese, his reason for not going to China was that his interest lies in ancient China. “All the classics and reference works are available in the library. What should I go to China for?”

Written by: Audrey