Unit 17 · The Classics Today, and Capstone

Look at how translators have rendered three words. Dao: "Way," "Tao," "path," "the Way" with a capital W, or left untranslated. Ren: "benevolence" (Legge), "goodness," "humaneness," "authoritative conduct," "perfect virtue." De: "virtue" (Legge), "power," "potency," "excellence." Each word gets several English lives.

Why so many? A key term carries a whole semantic field: a cluster of related meanings. Dao can mean path, method, teaching, speaking and the source of all things. No one English word covers them all. Each translator picks the part that seems most important for their reading.

Some translators leave key terms in Chinese, with a glossary. This keeps the field whole but asks more of readers. Others choose English words and accept loss. Neither choice is neutral. Knowing the range lets a reader see what a single translation highlights and what it hides.

Legge was a Christian missionary scholar. He sometimes linked Chinese terms to Christian ones, as when he discussed Shangdi, the "Lord on High," as a name for God. Later scholars noted this. Arthur Waley, writing in the 1930s, aimed at literary English. D. C. Lau, in the 1960s and 1970s, aimed at philosophical clarity.

More recent translators, such as Roger Ames and Henry Rosemont, argued that older English words like "virtue" and "benevolence" carry Western assumptions. They chose new terms, such as "authoritative conduct" for ren. Critics said the new terms were awkward or bring in their own assumptions. The debate continues.

This does not mean translations are useless. It means each is a reading, not a window. A careful student compares at least two translations of any key passage, notes the translator and date, and treats each word choice as evidence of the translator’s interpretation.

Chinese characters are often built from two or more smaller parts. Ren 仁 joins "person" 亻 with "two" 二. Shu 恕 joins "as" 如 with "heart" 心. Teachers often use these parts to explain meanings, and this picture of the parts can help learners remember new characters.

But scholars of Chinese writing warn about folk etymology: popular explanations of a word’s origin that are not historically accurate. Many characters’ parts give sound, not meaning. Some famous "character lessons" in English books and speeches are simply wrong. A well-known example is the claim that the word for "crisis" means "danger plus opportunity," which linguists have questioned.

The ancient forms of characters changed over time. Scholars study oracle bones, bronze inscriptions and early bamboo texts to trace them. A careful student can enjoy character parts as a memory aid while checking claims against good dictionaries and scholarship before building an argument on them.

In calligraphy, a brush, ink and paper record every movement of the hand. A stroke cannot be erased or retouched. The Jin dynasty calligrapher Wang Xizhi, of the 300s CE, is honored as the "Sage of Calligraphy." His Preface to the Orchid Pavilion Collection is among the most famous works of Chinese writing.

Writers on calligraphy have described it in both Confucian and Daoist terms. Copying models for years, as students did, echoes Confucian learning and ritual. The ideal of a free, unforced final stroke echoes Daoist naturalness and the skill of Cook Ding. Many calligraphers wrote lines from the classics as their texts.

Today calligraphy is taught in schools in China and Taiwan and in community classes in the United States. Some practitioners see it as art, some as meditation, some as heritage. This course describes these views. It does not ask readers to practice any of them as spiritual discipline.

Shanshui, literally "mountain-water," is the Chinese name for landscape painting. Great works such as Fan Kuan’s Travelers Among Mountains and Streams, from around 1000 CE, show vast peaks with tiny human figures. The painting is now in the National Palace Museum in Taipei.

Many writers link shanshui to Daoist ideas. People are small within nature. Mist and blank silk act like the empty space in Daodejing chapter 11, giving the scene its depth. Water and mountain can suggest yin and yang. Some art historians accept these links. Others stress Confucian and Buddhist influences, or painters’ own artistic goals.

Many museums in the United States hold Chinese paintings that visitors can see up close. When a painting’s label mentions Daoism, a careful viewer asks what evidence supports the link. Was the painter a Daoist? Did they write about the Dao? Or is the link a later reader’s interpretation?

Tai chi, or taijiquan, is a slow, flowing martial art. Its name uses taiji, the "supreme ultimate," a term linked with yin and yang. Many practitioners explain its movements through soft and hard, empty and full. Some teachers quote the Daodejing on water and softness.

A popular legend says the Daoist Zhang Sanfeng created tai chi after watching a crane and a snake fight. Historians note that written evidence for tai chi appears much later, and many trace its known lineages to the Chen family of Henan province in the 1600s, and to teachers of the 1800s. Both the legend and the history are part of how the practice understands itself.

Today tai chi is practiced in parks, community centers and hospitals around the world. Medical researchers study it for balance and health. For some it is Daoist practice; for others, exercise or heritage. This course describes it and does not lead any practice.

Many families in China, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Singapore and the diaspora describe values like respect for elders, family duty and effort in school. People often call these "Confucian values." But families differ widely, and many would not use that label at all.

Scholars debate how much weight Confucianism can bear here. In the 1990s, some leaders spoke of "Asian values" drawn from Confucian tradition. Critics said the phrase hid differences and was used to resist political change. Researchers today warn against explaining any family or student by one tradition.

Chinese American writers have described the model minority stereotype: the idea that all Asian Americans succeed through obedience and study. Many say it erases real struggles and diversity. A careful student can discuss Confucian ethics as ideas in texts and practice without turning them into a stereotype about people.

Popular culture borrows from the classics often. Animated films have used a wise old master who speaks in short, Daodejing-like sayings. Martial arts films draw on Daoist images of mountains, masters and inner energy. Video games set in ancient China may include sages, temples and yin-yang symbols.

Some of this is careful. Creators may consult scholars or draw on real stories. Some of it is caricature: exaggerated or mocking images that reduce a tradition to a joke or a costume. The long habit of joking "Confucius say" in fake broken English is one example that many Chinese Americans have described as hurtful.

A careful viewer can enjoy a film and still ask questions. Where does this saying come from? Is it a real text, a paraphrase or an invention? Is a real tradition shown with the respect its practitioners give it? These questions separate appreciation from caricature.

Chicago’s Chinatown, on the city’s South Side, holds a Lunar New Year parade each year, with lion dances, drums and crowds. Many families also clean their homes before New Year, visit relatives, give red envelopes and honor ancestors. Each family does these things in its own way.

Some families connect these practices to Confucian filial piety. Some connect them to Daoist or Buddhist temple life. Some see them simply as family and heritage. Many hold more than one view. Practices such as honoring the Kitchen God before New Year are sincere religious customs for many families and are described here with respect.

The classics you have studied are not only old books. For many people they live in greetings, in bows before an ancestor tablet, in a grandmother’s saying, in a quiet morning practice. A student who studies them well can recognize these living connections and describe them accurately and respectfully.

Many people outside Chinese traditions love the Daodejing, practice tai chi or hang calligraphy. Is this appreciation or appropriation? Scholars and practitioners give different answers. Most agree some things help: learning where a practice comes from, crediting its sources and listening to people for whom it is heritage or faith.

Some things harm. Selling a practice with invented "ancient" claims. Using sacred symbols as decoration without knowing their meaning. Treating living traditions as museum pieces or fantasy. Practitioners in Chinese communities have spoken about each of these.

This whole course is one kind of engagement: academic study. It quotes exactly, attributes carefully, describes practice without leading it, and names many readers. These habits of respect are the same ones that make any engagement with another tradition fair.

Your capstone focuses on one passage: an Analects saying, a Daodejing chapter, a Mencius argument or a Zhuangzi story. Good choices from this course include Analects 2.4, 12.1, 14.36 or 15.23; Daodejing 1, 8, 11 or 17; Mencius 2A.6 or 7B.14; and Zhuangzi 2, 3 or 17.

Look for three things. First, the passage should be short enough to study word by word. Second, it should have at least two well-documented readings. Third, it should matter to you: a question you actually want to answer. A passage everyone reads the same way leaves little to argue.

Write a research question before you begin. Weak: "What is Daodejing 8 about?" Stronger: "Why do readers take Daodejing 8’s water as advice for rulers in some readings and for private life in others?" A good research question names the passage, names a disagreement and asks why.

Scholars begin by establishing the text: saying exactly which version they are reading. For the Daodejing, that means the received text or a manuscript such as Mawangdui or Guodian. For the Analects, it means noting the book.chapter numbering and whether your edition numbers the saying differently.

Next, name your translation. This course quotes Legge’s public-domain translations exactly: the Analects (2nd ed., 1893), the Mencius (2nd ed., 1895), and the Tao Teh King and the Writings of Kwang-ze (Sacred Books of the East 39–40, 1891). Other translations should be paraphrased, with the translator and year named.

Last, note any textual issues. Does a word have two meanings, like dao? Is the passage in the inner or outer chapters of the Zhuangzi? Did a manuscript find change anything? A short paragraph on these points at the start of your paper shows readers you know what you are standing on.

First, textual context. Read the passages before and after yours. In the Analects, neighbors often share a theme. In the Daodejing, nearby chapters may use the same image. In the Mencius and Zhuangzi, your passage may be part of a longer conversation or story.

Second, historical context. Most of these texts took shape in the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, from about 770 to 221 BCE, a time of rival states and frequent war. Readers link the classics’ concern for order, harmony and humane rule to that setting. Note what scholars say, and say "c." for uncertain dates.

Third, conceptual context. Identify the key terms your passage uses, such as ren, li, de, Dao or wu wei, and gloss each. Show where else in the text the term appears. This triangulation, reading from three sides, keeps your interpretation grounded in more than one sentence.

Pick a commentator who wrote on your text. For the Analects or Mencius: He Yan or Zhu Xi, or Wang Yangming for Mencian themes. For the Daodejing: Wang Bi or Heshang Gong. For the Zhuangzi: Guo Xiang. Legge’s notes often summarize Zhu Xi’s readings, which is a useful starting point in English.

Describe the commentator’s reading in your own words, and attribute it clearly: "Zhu Xi reads this line as..." or "In Wang Bi’s commentary..." Name the source: the commentary’s title and, if you used one, the English translation or scholarly summary you relied on. Do not quote a modern translation of a commentary; paraphrase it.

Then ask what question the commentator was answering. Wang Bi’s concern with nonbeing, Zhu Xi’s concern with principle and Guo Xiang’s concern with each thing’s own nature all shape their readings. Naming that question shows you understand why the reading looks as it does.

Modern readers include those studied in this course: Legge himself, May Fourth critics like Lu Xun, New Confucians like Mou Zongsan, Western readers like Tolstoy, translators like Waley and Le Guin, and feminist scholars. Choose one whose reading of your passage, or of its key idea, you can document.

Be precise about what the modern reader said. If Tolstoy admired the Daodejing’s nonviolence, say so; do not claim he wrote about a chapter he never discussed. If Legge judged 15.23 weaker than the Gospel rule, cite his notes. Where you connect a reader to your passage yourself, say that the connection is yours.

Modern readers often bring the concerns of their own time: reform, revolution, identity, gender, global ethics. Name those concerns. A modern reading is not less valid than a classical one. It is a reading from a different place. Treating both with the same care is the fairness this course asks for.

Scholars study texts with methods others can check: dating manuscripts, comparing editions, tracing terms, weighing arguments. For your capstone, find one scholar’s view of your passage or its key term. Good places to look include the introductions to scholarly translations, encyclopedias of philosophy and university library databases.

Summarize the scholar’s argument and evidence. For example: many scholars argue from the Guodian slips that the Daodejing grew over time. Or: scholars debate whether Analects 4.15’s "one thread" reflects Zeng Zi’s later school. Name the scholar or source, the title and the year.

Scholars disagree with each other too. If you find two scholars on opposite sides, that is a gift: describe both. Your job is not to find the one "right" scholar and stop there. It is to show the state of the question: what is known, what is debated, and why.

A thesis is the main claim of your paper. In this capstone it has two parts: what the passage means in your reading, and why readers differ. For example: "Daodejing 1 is best read as a claim about the limits of language, and translators differ because dao means both ’path’ and ’speak.’"

Your thesis is about interpretation, not religious truth. You may argue which reading best fits the words, the context or the evidence. You do not argue whether the Dao is real or whether Confucianism is true. Keeping that line clear is part of academic study in a public school.

Support each point with evidence: a quotation or paraphrase of the passage, a neighboring passage, a commentator, a modern reader and a scholar. Then address a counterargument, the strongest reading that differs from yours, and explain fairly why you still hold your view.

Cite quotations precisely: text, book or chapter and verse, translator, edition and year. For example: Analects 15.23, trans. James Legge, The Chinese Classics vol. 1, 2nd ed., 1893. Mark paraphrases as paraphrases. Do not quote copyrighted modern translations at length; describe their word choices instead.

Attribute every belief and reading. Write "Confucius taught," "the Daodejing says," "Daoists practice," "Zhu Xi read," "some scholars argue." Avoid sentences that state a tradition’s teaching as simple fact, like "The Dao is the source of all things." Write instead "The Daodejing describes the Dao as the source of all things."

Check your wording for respect. Use each tradition’s own terms with a gloss. Describe practices such as ancestor rites or temple offerings as their practitioners understand them. Avoid loaded words. These habits are not only rules. They are how a careful writer earns the trust of readers from every tradition.

A simple order works well. Show the passage on one slide with its citation. Give one slide for context. Give one slide per reading: commentator, modern reader, scholar. Then state your thesis, your strongest evidence and the counterargument you answered. End with one open question.

Keep slides calm and readable. Use large, high-contrast text and few words per slide. Put the passage in a box by itself so the class can read it slowly. A side-by-side chart of readings, like the comparison charts in this course, can help listeners see differences at a glance.

Invite questions, and answer them fairly. If a classmate belongs to the tradition you studied, listen to what they add. Presenting is also a chance to model the stance of this course: curious, precise and respectful toward every reader of the text.

Over this course you have read the Analects, the Daodejing, the Mencius and the Zhuangzi. You have met disciples, sages, commentators, emperors, critics, translators, practitioners and families. You have seen one line read as advice for rulers, a guide for the self, a ritual text and a joke between friends.

The skills you practiced reach beyond these books. Establish the text. Set the context. Gather readings from different places. Attribute every view. Compare without flattening or ranking. Argue about meaning while respecting belief. These are the habits of a careful reader in any field.

Priya’s four index cards showed that careful readers can disagree for good reasons. Your capstone adds one more card to the long row of readers. It will not be the last word. The classics have outlasted every reading so far, and new readers, including you, will keep asking what they mean.