Big Tradition and Chinese Mythological Studies

254 Pages·2020·14.992 MB·English

by  Jiansheng Hu

Jiansheng Hu
Big Tradition
and Chinese
Mythological
Studies
Big Tradition and Chinese Mythological Studies
Jiansheng Hu
Big Tradition and Chinese
Mythological Studies
123
Jiansheng Hu
Schoolof Humanities
ShanghaiJiao Tong University
Shanghai, China
ThisbookisfundedbytheInstituteforMythologicalStudiesofShanghaiJiaoTongUniversity.
ISBN978-981-15-4633-4 ISBN978-981-15-4634-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4634-1
JointlypublishedwithShanghaiJiaoTongUniversityPress
TheprinteditionisnotforsaleinChinaMainland.CustomersfromChinaMainlandpleaseorderthe
printbookfromShanghaiJiaoTongUniversityPress.
©ShanghaiJiaoTongUniversityPress2020
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsaresolelyandexclusivelylicensedbythePublisher,whether
thewholeorpartofthematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseof
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmissionorinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilar
ordissimilarmethodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Thepublishers,theauthors,andtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthis
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publishers nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publishers remain neutral with regard to
jurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Contents
Part I Cultural Theory of Big Tradition
1 A Comparative Study on Chinese Big Tradition and Western
Great Tradition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1 Cultural Arrogance Complex of Great Tradition: Literary Text. . . . 4
2 Launch of the Big Tradition Theory and Cultural Text . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Archetype of Big Tradition: Reconstruction of Mythic History
by Prehistoric Archetype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4 Epilogue: Poetic Reveries of Big Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 Culture as Text: Producing New Texts for Non-text
Representations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1 New Text Called by New Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2 New Text as Non-text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3 Producing an Effective Cultural Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4 Retelling: A New Turn in Knowledge Archaeology. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5 From Deciphering to Retranslation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3 Knowledge Innovation of the Big Tradition in Chinese
Literary Anthropology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1 The Transferal of Cultural Values: Pre-historical “Little
Tradition” to Cultural “Big Tradition” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2 TheOriginalityofMeaningGeneration:FromtheQuadraticCode
of Written Culture to the Material Image of Oral Culture. . . . . . . . 31
3 The Existence of Cultural Imagination: Textual Expression
and Material Image Representation, Which One Is True?. . . . . . . . 32
4 The Contradiction of Knowledge Innovation: From
Structuralism-Oriented to Mythologies-Oriented . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
v
vi Contents
4 New Development of Chinese Literary Anthropology . . . . . . . . . . . 37
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2 Post-modern Concept of Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3 Return to the Sacred Context of the Big Tradition. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4 Cultural Expansion of Mythological Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5 Discoveries of Things from Cultural Big Tradition. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
1 Things Are Not “things” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2 Presence of Things . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3 Narration of Things. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4 Presentation of Real Things . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Part II Mythical China
6 Review on Contemporary Studies of Chinese Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
1 New Conceptual Turn of “Myth” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2 Mythological China: Recognizing the Standpoint
of China’s Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
7 Origin of Humanity: Images on Prehistoric Colored Pottery
and Chinese Spirituality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
1 Arguments Over the Origin of Taiji Chart Theory in Ancient
Classical Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
2 Yin and Yang Dualism Shown on Prehistoric Colored Pottery. . . . 81
3 Cross-Cultural Study on Image of yin and yang on Prehistoric
Colored Pottery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
8 Mythological Fantasy and Archetype Coding of the Divine
Bear Imagery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
1 From “only emblematic figures for the construction
of implements” to “emblematic figures underlying
the construction of implements”: The Divine Imagery
Convention in the Era of Big Tradition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
2 Mythological Fantasy of the Bear: The Imagery of the Divine
Bear Operating in a Sacred Form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
3 Archetype Coding and Spatial Order of the Divine Bear
Imagery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
Contents vii
9 Image Combination of Goddess Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
1 School of Realistic Art of Style . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
1.1 School of Totem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
1.2 School of Primitive Religious Symbol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
1.3 Urn Coffin and Secondary Burial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
2 Cultural Connotations of Birds and Fishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
3 Cultural Connotation of the Zax Image. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
10 Original Way from the Cultural Big Tradition: A Study
on the Divine Belief and Mythological Images of “Tao” . . . . . . . . . 169
1 Understanding “Tao” from the Live Verbal Evidences. . . . . . . . . . 169
2 Mythological Ceremony and Divine Belief of “Tao” . . . . . . . . . . . 172
3 Prototype of the Transformation of “Tao” in Circular Motion . . . . 182
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
11 What is Man: Original Strength and Psychological Structure
Revealed by Chinese Genesis Myth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
1 Man,HeavenandEarth:CompleteGenerationofManinChinese
Creation Myth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
2 Man and Things: In Chinese Creation Mythology Man
and Things Share the Same Origin but Differ in Essences . . . . . . . 199
3 Differentiation of Man in the World: In Chinese Creation
Mythology the Primitive Strength of Man Gradually Decays . . . . . 204
4 Man and Disease: Lost of the Divine Strength of Creation
and the Corresponding Remedy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
12 Mythical Identity and Juristical Authority of Yueruo Jigu. . . . . . . 213
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
2 Restoration to the “Big Tradition” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
3 Identity of “Yueruo” in Myth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
4 Mythical Juristical Authority of “Jigu” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
13 The Cultural Interpretation of “Golden Sound and Jade
Vibration”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
1 The Big Tradition in the Sacred Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
2 Golden Sound Mythology of Evil Dispelling and God
Invitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
3 The Symbolic Representations of Jade Vibration Mythology . . . . . 241
4 The Psychic Realm of the Sage Communicating with Gods. . . . . . 251
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
Part I
Cultural Theory of Big Tradition
Based on the actual materials and practical experience of Chinese local culture,
literaryanthropologyreferstotheculturaltraditionandcivilizationstateintheperiod
beforetheemergenceofwritingasthebigculturaltradition,andtheculturaltradition
andcivilizationstateaftertheemergenceofwritingasthesmallculturaltradition.
The distinction between big and small cultural traditions provides a new cultural
perspectiveandsacredvaluefortheinterpretationofearlyChinesecultureandliterary
theory.
Chapter 1
A Comparative Study on Chinese Big
Tradition and Western Great Tradition
InhisbookPeasantSocietyandCulture:AnAnthropologicalApproachtoCiviliza-
tion published in 1956, American anthropologist Robert Redfield put forward the
westernculturaltheoryofgreattraditionandlittletradition.Here,thegreattradition
referstothewrittentraditionspreadbyphilosophers,theologiansandwritersamong
schoolsandtemples,whichistherethinkingtraditionofasmallnumberofmenof
letters; while the little tradition refers to the oral cultural tradition of the peasants
inruralareas,whichisthenon-rethinkingtraditionforamajorityofpeasants.1 In
recent years, Ye Shuxian has made a new cultural transformation on the western
theoryofgreattraditionandlittletradition,sayingthat“Itisnecessarytotransform
Redfield’s concepts from an opposite angle. According to the classification index
insemiology,weshouldreviewtheculturaltraditionbycallingthecharacter-coded
cultural tradition as the small tradition, and the cultural tradition in nonverbal era,
the big tradition.”2 In literary anthropology, the big tradition refers to the cultural
tradition in prehistoric non-writing era, while the small tradition refers to the one
aftertheinventionofwriting.
Chinese literary anthropologists, based on the spiritual characteristics of local
culture,initiatethebigtraditionthathaslocalculturalsignificanceinrediscovering
theoriginofChinesecivilizationandculturalwisdom.Intheexpressionofgreattradi-
tionfromEuropeanandAmericanculture,theword“great”implies“grand”,“elite”
and cultural approval, which belongs to the “high culture” (as opposite to the low
culture),the“classicculture”(oppositetothefolkculture)orthe“learnedculture”
(opposite to the popular culture)3, which signifies the dual opposite judgment of
westernrationalisticconsciousness.Inthe“bigtradition”inliteraryanthropology,the
word“big”means“infinite”,“non-existent”,“extremelylarge”,and“tremendously
1Robert Redfield, Peasant Society and Culture: an Anthropological Approach to Civilization,
Chicago:theUniversityofChicagoPress,1956,p.70.
2YeShuxian,BigtraditionandsmalltraditioninChineseculture,DangJian,2007,vol.2,pp.49–51.
3Robert Redfield, Peasant Society and Culture: an Anthropological Approach to Civilization,
Chicago:theUniversityofChicagoPress,1956,p.70.
©ShanghaiJiaoTongUniversityPress2020 3
J.Hu,BigTraditionandChineseMythologicalStudies,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4634-1_1
4 1 AComparativeStudyonChineseBigTradition…
long-lasting”, which stands for modern culture root-seeking and unconsciousness
unification.Therearehugedifferencesbetweenthesetwoconcepts.
1 CulturalArroganceComplexofGreatTradition:
LiteraryText
Redfieldusedgreattraditiontorefertotheliteraryculturalsystem,whichisthehier-
archicculture(oppositetothelayculture)4thatfullyconfirmsandexpectsthepost-
historiceliteculture.Thiswilleasilyleadtoadualstructuralantagonismbetween
the elite and the secular cultures. In Han Officials and Cultural Communication,
YuYing-shihacceptedthetheoryofgreatandlittletraditions,deemingthat“After
the 1950s, Robert Redfield’s theory of great tradition and little tradition was once
popularandhasnotdisappeareduntilnow.However,intherecentyearsamongthe
westernacademiccircleinhistoryscience,thereisatrendthattheconceptsofelite
cultureandpopularculturemayreplacetheformertheory.Althoughthenamesare
different, they are similar in nature. Generally speaking, the great tradition or the
elitecultureisfortheupperclassorintelligentsia,whiletheLittleTraditionorthe
popularculturebelongstoordinarypeoplewhodonotreceiveformaleducation…
At an early stage, the Chinese culture was categorized into two levels, ‘elegance’
and‘popularity’,whichareequivalenttotheGreatTraditionandLittleTradition,or
thediscrepancybetweenthetwo.”5
Yu Ying-shih mechanically transplanted the theory of great and little traditions
onto the Han culture by directly converting it into two cultural levels, “elegance”
and“popularity”,whichhighlightedthesuperiorityandhighnessoftheeliteculture
while belittling folk culture and tradition among those non-educated. As a result,
hedirectlyintroducedtheculturalbiasofwesternanthropologytothediscussionof
Hanculture.
Here,let’stakealookattheculturalfeaturesofgreattradition:
Greattraditionpointstopost-historictime.Asanempiricalintuition,theexistence
of time has endurance and continuity of past, presence, and future. In particular,
as the historical extension of natural time, the existence of later time is not only
extendedfromtheprevioustimebutalsochangesthepasthistoricalexperienceand
lifeenergyintothepresentexistenceoftime.Thereisnoculturaldifferenceoflife
energyamongthepast,presence,andfutureoftheexistenceofhistoricaltime.Ifwe
callthepost-historicculture“thegreattradition”,wewillamplifythelifeexistence
andenergyvalueofpost-historictimeandneglectandrepulsetheoriginallifetime
and energy, leading to a cultural conflict between time processes. If we transplant
4Robert Redfield, Peasant Society and Culture: an Anthropological Approach to Civilization,
Chicago:theUniversityofChicagoPress,1956,p.70.
5YuYing-shih,BachelorsandChineseCulture,Shanghai:ShanghaiRenminPress,2003,pp.117–
118.