Leopard Change: The Evolution of the Junzi Personality Aesthetic from the Han to the Northen and Southern Dynasties

Yuan Jixi

Abstract： The junzi personality is an aesthetic exemplar of traditional Chinese culture， especially the Confucian culture， and the discrimination between the junzi and petty person is a persisting topic. The Book of Changes concludes that “whereas the noble man （junzi） would change like the leopard changes its spots， the petty man should radically change his countenance.” In the historical period spanning from the pre-Qin period， through the Han， Wei， Jin， down to the Northern and Southern dynasties， the personality of junzi has undergone certain changes， where this originally Confucian paradigm merged into Lao–Zhuang Daoism and the Dark Learning， and finally sent its repercussions as far as literary aesthetics， as illustrated in the work of literary theory， the Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons.

Keywords： aesthetic of personality， junzi personality， leopard change， literary criticism

The “Ge” [革] hexagram of the Book of Changes says， “whereas the noble man （junzi 君子）i would change like the leopard changes its spots， the petty man （xiaoren 小人） should radically change his countenance.” What is meant by this statement is that the junzi can advance with the times and reinvigorate his commitments like a leopard variegating its spots， whereas the petty person can only curry favor with his or her superior by sizing up the countenance， with no intention to innovate. The contrast between junzi and petty persons discrimination has been one of the ethical problematics of early China， and has also influenced Chinese aesthetic theories and criticism as well. In the period spanning from the Han （206 BCE–220 CE） to the Northern and Southern dynasties （420–589）， the junzi personality has mutated with the rebirth of the old things after reflection and critique， while the new ideas have gained sustained momentum in reflection. Such evolution was clearly manifested in the magnum opus Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons [文心雕龍].

Conceptions of the Junzi Personality in the Qin and??Han Dynasties [Refer to page 30 for Chinese. Similarly hereinafter]

The Hundred Schools of Thought in the pre-Qin period were concerned with the doctrine of the junzi. Confucius associated the junzi personality with daily life， espousing an ideal personality that transcended reality. For instance， in Analects 1：1， Confucius said， “Is it not a pleasure， having learned something， to try it out at due intervals？ Is it not a joy to have like-minded friends come from afar？ Is this not a junzi not to take offence when others fail to appreciate your abilities？” In 1：14， Confucius continued， “The junzi seeks neither a full belly nor a comfortable home. He is quick in action but cautious in speech. He goes to men possessed of the Way （dao 道） to have himself put right. Such a man can be described as eager to learn.” Confucius reiterated that a junzi， committed to the Way cannot be afraid to face a hard life. Along this line of thought， he commended Yan Hui 顏回 （521–481 BCE） for his being content in poverty and his relentless following of the Way.

For a junzi， what matters the most is vision and firmness. For thousands of years since， the junzi personality has been eulogized as outlined in the Book of Changes in the following statements： “The movement of heaven is full of power， thus the junzi makes himself strong and untiring” （“Qian” [乾]; Baynes， 103）; and “The earths condition is receptive devotion， thus the junzi who has breadth of character carries the outer world” （“Kun” [坤]; Baynes， 112）. As can be seen， it is no arbitrary matter that the junzi personality has become the core of Chinese personality conception.

In the Zhongyong，

Confucius said， “Junzi focus the familiar affairs of the day; petty persons distort them. Junzi are able to focus the affairs of the day because， being exemplary， they themselves constantly abide in equilibrium. Petty persons are a source of distortion in the affairs of the day， because， being petty persons， they lack the requisite caution and concern.”

It is highly plausible to take the Way of zhongyong 中庸 （centrality） as the demarcating line between the junzi and petty persons. In todays terms， the doctrine of centrality is the benchmark for a persons conduct.

The junzi personality is comprised of the uniformity of inner cultivation and outer demeanor， an organic union of inner and outer beauty. In Analects 6：18 it says， “When there is a preponderance of native substance over acquired refinement， the result will be churlishness. When there is a preponderance of acquired refinement over native substance， the result will be pedantry. Only when culture and native substance are perfectly mixed and balanced do you have a junzi.” In the “Commentary on the Words of the Text” [文言傳] for the “Kun” [坤] hexagram in the Book of Changes， “The junzi， garbed in yellow and maintaining the Mean， thoroughly grasps the principles of things， and can square up his status to follow the rites. He is beautiful internally and externalizes the beauty with his limbs and expresses in his deeds. Beauty culminates when evoked in the cause.”

In Confucian teachings， modesty is merely a superficial manifestation of the junzi personality， whilst the genuine junzi must promote the Way and practice righteousness （yi 義）， committing themselves to nothing but benevolence （ren 仁）. In this vein， in the field of literature and arts， the junzi is responsible and dutiful for rectifying music. According to the “Records of Music” [樂記] of the Records of Rites， “only the junzi knows what music is.” As noted in the “Discourse on Music” [樂論] in the Xunzi， “The junzi takes joy in attaining the Way. The petty man takes joy in attaining the object of his desires. If one takes the Way to regulate ones desires， then one will be happy and not disordered. If one forgets the Way for the sake of ones desires， then one will be confused and unhappy.”

For the Daoists， the Confucian ideal of the junzi personality was achieved at the cost of individual freedom， and is a product of alienation. They held that in far antiquity， people lived at ease， making no distinction between the junzi and petty person， and what was truly pathetic was that a junzi had to attain fame at the cost of his or her own interests and freedoms. Zhuangzi once， in the persona of an allegorical figure， lampooned the hypocrisy of the junzi， saying， “I heard that the ‘junzi in the middle state are clear about rites （li 禮） and righteousness but ignorant of the human heart” （Zhuangzi， chap. 21）. Criticism of the hypocrisy and the violation of human nature symbiotic with the idea of the junzi personality promulgated by Confucianism have constituted an important part of Lao–Zhuang doctrines， and have also affected the intellectual culture of the generations to come.

Laozi held a negative attitude toward Confuciuss idea of a junzi personality. As Laozi asserted，

Heaviness provides the root for what is light; stillness wields her scepter over what is noisy. For this reason， the sage travels all day and does not leave his wagon-train. Only when in his gate tower at rest， does he see beyond. How is it that the lord of ten thousand chariots can so lightly scorn the world？ Were he light then he would fall away from the root; were he noisy then he would fall away from the scepter.

Laozi characterized the junzi as “looking to the simple， holding the undistinguished， reducing self-love， and curbing desire” （Laozi， chap. 19）， as well as “setting everything right by exercising clarity and equilibrium （jing 靜）” （chap. 45）， running counter to the Confucian pattern of personality. Laozis conception of ideal personality has influenced Ji Kangs 嵇康 （ca. 223–ca. 262） ideas about the junzi.

When it comes to the Han dynasty， the states were governed according to Confucian doctrines. The Records of Rites took shape in the Qin （221–206 BCE） and Han， the bulk of which is dominated by discourse on the junzi personality. In this book， the junzi personality roughly refers to the scholar-officials personality fashioned with rites and righteousness. Confucianism in the Han dynasty forged aspects of the junzi culture into an intact system for the cultivation of moral personality. The teachings were enacted on the basis of the nomenclature， thus emerged a system of governing by names and teachings， complicated bureaucracy and tangled rites， and finally became a source of negativity unbearable to society. Intellectuals consumed their energy engrossed in the study of Confucian classics， resulting in the lack of independent personality and intellectual freedom， to the detriment of the spiritual life.

In the Han dynasty， the teachings of rites promulgated by the Confucians became the doctrine for intellectuals. On one hand， many worthies with moral integrity have been produced as a result. For instance， in the Eastern Han （25–220）， despite political turbidity and social turmoil， many scholars， with no regard for their own security， plunged into political reform and critical activities， resulting in an uprising， and were persecuted by the emperor and the eunuch officials， culminating with the suppression of conspiratorial cliques. On the other hand， since the time when Liu Xiu 劉秀， Emperor Guangwu of the Eastern Han （r. 25–57）， promoted Confucian principles as the device to govern the state， Confucianism was also involved in the selection of talents and officials. Many intellectuals cheated in order to obtain access to officialdom. Thus， the system of appointment for public service was degraded， and the notion of the junzi personality was irretrievably distorted. “The selected candidate knows not to read; check if he is filial to his parents， it is found that his father lives elsewhere.” In the meantime， the doctrine of names and teachings were the shackles that gripped peoples minds and acts. Some false junzi eulogized themselves and belittled others with the doctrine of names and teachings. In consequence， the junzi personality was sullied， and a rehabilitation of the junzi personality had to be put on the agenda.

Evolution of the Junzi Personality Aesthetic since?the Wei–Jin Period [33]

At the close of the Eastern Han， the Yellow Turbans Uprising （184） by peasants and Dong Zhuos 董卓 （d. 192） tyrannical rule facilitated the de facto collapse of the Eastern Han government. The tripartite antipathy of the Three Kingdoms （220–280） ensued. Confucianism and its doctrines and teachings as the ideology for the Eastern Han was also changed. The conception of the junzi personality also underwent a gradual transformation.

During these turbulent years， some scholars inherited the traditional conception of the junzi personality. At the end of Emperor Lings （r. 167–189） reign， scholars ethos declined; the scholar-officials engaged in social activities and made friends with the bureaucrats. Xu Gan 徐幹 （171–217） showed no regard for this situation. He then engrossed himself in reading and shut himself up indoors， a person-hood only attained by a genuine junzi. Xu adhered to the integrity of his personality amidst chaos， labeling himself as a junzi of elegance and attainment， he prided himself on the way he governed his family. He was keen on reading the Six Classics and indulged in reading even when fasting. He composed the Discourse on the Middle [中論]， promoting a Confucian doctrine of politics and personality. Among his contemporaries， Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 （127–200）， Zhao Qi 趙岐 （ca. 108–201）， and He Xiu 何休 （129–182）， and some other scholars， spared no efforts in realizing their personality ideals of the junzi through pursuing study of the Confucian classics and composing their own works. It is a pity that some of them were killed for being involved in politics， such as Li Ying 李膺 （110–169）， Chen Fan 陳蕃 （d. 168）， and Cai Yong 蔡邕 （132–192）.

During the Jianan period （196–220）， many scholar-officials had no choice but to follow Cao Cao 曹操 （155–220）， Yuan Shao 袁紹 （d. 202）， Liu Bei 劉備 （161–223）， or Sun Quan 孫權 （182–252）， the warlords of the military clans. Nevertheless， they did not give up their adherence to the traditional notions of the junzi personality. Some of them， such as Yang Xiu 楊修 （175–219）， Cui Yan 崔琰 （d. 216）， and Kong Rong 孔融 （153–208）， were even killed for being reluctant to collaborate with the military clans， but still many of them reflected on the nature of the junzi personality. In the Three Kingdoms period， Zhuge Liang 諸葛亮 （181–234）， in his “Discourse on Admonishing a Son” [誡子書]， cautioned his son with the traditional Confucian notion of junzi personality. He said，

A junzi should conduct himself in this way： to practice equilibrium is to pursue self-cultivation and to be thrifty is to nurture morality. He cannot illuminate his intention without indifference and cannot reach afar without equilibrium. To be calm goes before learning and to learn precedes being talented. Without learning， the realm of knowledge cannot be expanded; without intention， learning cannot be achieved. Overindulgence prevents delicacy; over-sensitivity curbs the control of mood. Years flow with the passing of the intent， which eventually declines， failing to accommodate to the times. If ones life is confined to an old hut， is it not pathetic？

The rulers policy of human resources also changed with time. The policy they initiated went against the traditional pattern of the junzi personality. In his “Edict to Seek Talents” [求賢令]， Cao Cao intimated that since antiquity， a governor whose state was on the rise hoped to obtain junzi-like worthies， but in a state of urgency， one may have to resort to employing unknown junzi. He said，

If no one but the unsullied junzi had been used， how could Duke Huan of Qi （r. 685–643 BCE） have reigned over the world？ Is there still a junzi who wears coarse clothes， possesses jade-like wisdom and fishes at the River Wei like Jiang Ziya 姜子牙？ Is there someone like Chen Ping 陳平 （d. 178 BCE） who was framed with fornicating with his sister-in-law and receiving bribery but still held in high esteem by Liu Bang 劉邦 （ca. 256–195 BCE）？ You should help me to figure out the humble but talented. I only employ those talented. I seek them and utilize them.

In the “Edict to Recommend the Talented with No Restraint on Moral Quality and Conduct” [舉賢勿拘品行令]， Cao Cao even argued，

How cannot we have those who are of ultimate morality among the folks nowadays？ With bravery and determination， he could plunge into the enemies with no concern for his own life. Those who have elegant but moderate temperament and are of extraordinary faculty might be a defending general. Those who suffer from infamy and mockery， or who are of no filial piety and benevolence can also be used in that way. Please recommend those people， as many as you know， and leave none behind.

The principle of recommending only those talented is an attack on the previous notion of the junzi.

The idea of talent utilization of the Wei had a revolutionary effect on the idea of seeking talents according to the doctrine of names and teachings which was in practice at the end of the Eastern Han. Liu Shao 劉邵， an examiner for public service， noted that a talent should be assessed against his caliber and the mismatch between name and reality should be eliminated. He said，

The beauty of the sagely and the worthy lies in being wise; being wise is cherished for knowing a persons values. Knowing persons against the standard of sincerity （cheng 誠） and wisdom can ensure the sequencing of talented people， and the achievements can be arrived at. Thus， the sage scripted images and hexagrams， and then transcribed the words of the junzi and the petty men. To narrate the intention of the Book of Songs is to discriminate the various poetic forms; to formulate rites and music is to examine ones credibility and earnestness with the six arts. If enthroned， one can invite in outstanding and handsome talents to assist. And finally， one can perform much benevolence and succeed on a heavenly scale.

Ruan Ji 阮籍 （210–263） and Ji Kang， among the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo Glade （zhulin qi xian 竹林七賢）， are the key figures who vehemently critiqued the Han notion about junzi and ideas about rites and teaching. Ruan Ji was active in an age when the Sima clique had arisen stealthily and intended to usurp power from the rule of the Cao clan. The Sima clique governed the state under the doctrine of names and teaching. An entourage of intellectuals of rites and laws emerged to follow it. Among them， a scholar of rites and laws， named himself as a “junzi” and reprimanded Ruan Ji for his wanton conduct that violated the code for a junzi. Ruan retorted by blaming him for locking up human nature into a cell， saying， “The Heavenly rites are enacted to restrain every inch of the life. . . . Its absurdity is contemptible and its effects are deplorable.”

In “A Profile of a Great Man” [大人先生傳]， Ruan Ji explicated his ideal of the junzi as a state of “roaming beyond heaven and earth， making friends with nature， eating in the eastern vale [where the sun rises] at daybreak and drinking in the West Sea at dusk， changing with the changes of nature and cycling with the cycle of the Way，” and showing contempt at the rites and laws of the mundane world. This implies that the Wei–Jin ethos of the junzi personality has undergone an evolution. In “Acquainted with Zhuangzis Ideas” [達莊論]， Ruan Ji consciously reinterpreted the junzi personality in light of Lao–Zhuangs Way of nature， contending that the new version of the junzi personality followed nature as its principle， and the violation of the Way of nature would lead to the loss of facilitation of heaven and earth， the dimness of the sun and the moon， the feud between father and son， and the disloyalty between monarch and subjects.

The Wei–Jin elites prized the aesthetic of natural demeanor. They refashioned the properties of the junzi， as opposed to the hypocritical junzi personality of the Sima clique. Ji Kang not only got involved in the conflict with the counterfeit junzi， the agent for the Sima clique in real life， he also conceptually reevaluated the theory on junzi， or which the most famous article is “On Interpreting Self-Love” [釋私論]. Over a long period， Confucians argued that to distinguish between the public and the self depended on external acts. But in view of Ji Kang， the standard to figure out the public or the self is the sincerity in ones heart-mind， rather than external moral judgments.

The one who is entitled to be a junzi should care nothing about right–wrong judgment and not go against his hearts will， nor against the Way. Why do I say so？ The one who is calm in air and void in countenance has no conceits in his heart; the one who is sincere in conduct and magnanimous in heart is not restrained by desire. To absent conceits from the mind enables one to transcend names and teachings and follow nature; to free oneself from the shackles of desire empowers one to discriminate the worthy and the unworthy， as well as to communicate with things and feelings. The smooth traffic in things and feelings leads to the removal of blockage on the Way; the transcendence beyond names and conformity to the heart-mind lead to the nonchalance to the others right–wrong judgment. Then， when commenting on junzi， the criteria should be to suspend right–wrong judgments and prioritize communication with things such as beauty. When commenting on a petty person， he should be blamed for concealing facts and violating the Way. Why？ To conceal facts and to indulge in conceited parsimony are the ultimate vice of petty men; to be modest and to accommodate is what a junzi should practice assiduously.

What is voiced in this excerpt is indeed striking. For Ji Kang， a junzi is a person who should be immune to external right–wrong judgments from deep in his heart and who does not pursue utilitarian achievements. If he is swayed by right–wrong judgments， he would lose his ground and become vainglorious. Ji captured the key defect of the Han personality theory. Since the Han dynasty， utilizing merits or demerits to qualify a junzi has sought to encourage in people the desire to seek vain glory. In view of this， Ji Kang claimed that the fashioning of the junzi personality depends on the magnanimity of ones inner world， with sincerity and integrity as the criteria to qualify a person as a junzi. In this sense， this is also an effort to restyle the junzi personality theory away from the Han version. Ji Kangs standards for a junzi are as follows：

A junzi has an inner quality within himself and also can have the manifestation of this quality which may be seen. A noble man is luminous and magnanimous， and these qualities should be cherished and reserved; a petty man is arrogant and stingy， and these qualities should be relinquished and kept far away. An error is committed and shame would arise before divinity; a defect is concealed and abashment would creep up to the face. Words cannot be prevaricated recklessly; conduct cannot be covered arbitrarily. He does not defend a thing for loving it; nor blame a thing for hating it. In his heart， there is no cause for arrogance for and nothing to which feeling is attached. With refreshed body and rectified mind， any judgment would be made fairly. Loyalty would move the son of Heaven; credibility is due to the people. The mind would expand far and wide; magnanimity would suspend to the eternal. Is it not for these qualities that a junzi of lofty virtue stands out among the common people？

The redefinition of junzi by Ji Kang inherits the original ideas of loyalty and faithfulness. In addition， he integrates the Way of nature of Laozi and Zhuangzi into it. It results in a synthesis of name-teachings and nature. The rhetorical question “Is it not for these qualities that a junzi of lofty virtue stands out among the common people？” marked the rebirth of the notion of the junzi personality. This is also a mirroring of Ji Kangs own personality. He recast the junzi personality into his own image. The Book of Jin [晉書]， a compilation made in the Tang dynasty （618–907）， presents the image of Ji Kang as follows：

[Ji] Kang was orphaned in his early years and extraordinarily talented， always alone and remote from others. He was seven chi and eight cun tall. He was skilled at composing beautiful essays and well-poised in his demeanor. He cut a natural figure and wore no ornaments. In the eyes of others he was outstanding in air and born with a natural disposition. He was tranquil and devoid of desire， unsullied and undefiled， simple but magnanimous. Well-versed and knowledgeable， he learned by himself. The Laozi and the Zhuangzi were his habitual reading materials. He married himself into the royal family of the Wei dynasty and was appointed as Grand Master of Palace Leisure. He was often on a diet to nurture his disposition， he strummed the strings， recited poems and was content with his way of life.

Ji Kang introduced macrobiotic theory into his theory of junzi personality. His “Discourse on Preserving Health” [養生論] notes that health depends on the nurturing of spirit and the nurturing of spirit is inseparable from resistance to external attractions. Obviously， this rings with the idea of independence in theories on personality.

Inevitably， Ji Kangs notions about junzi resulted in little resonance from others for its loftiness. He himself felt isolated. Even his elder brother， Ji Xi 嵇喜， tried to persuade him out of his insistence on these notion and into following more popular ideas. Ji Xi versified， “A junzi should know how to accommodate; obstruction and facilitation alternate. At the favorable moment one should practice righteousness; in unfavorable times one should withdraw intact from the situation. The wise can discern the smooth or the blocked; he knows that flourishing and decline are reciprocally dependent.” This stanza of Ji Xis poem is the reflection of some scholars personality ideas at that time， far removed from the genuine junzi personality. The conception around the junzi personality has become the image of vulgar philosophy. In this light， we can see the split in views about the meaning of junzi.

Xiang Xiu 向秀 （ca. 227–272）， one of the Seven Worthies of the Bamboo Glade， wrote his “Discourse on the Difficulty of Preserving Health” [難養生論] as a retort to Ji Kangs “Discourse on Preserving Health.” He attempted to persuade Ji Kang to comply with desire and compromise with the worldly， rather than adhering to clarity and loftiness. Ji Kang fought back with “A Response to Discourse on the Difficulty of Preserving Health” [答難養生論]， in which he strongly critiqued Xiang Xius philosophy of life for the pursuit of immediate pleasures and a surrendering attitude. Ji Kang stated， “If taking great harmony as the ultimate pleasure， we would put honor and glory in no regard; if taking the tasteless as the ultimate flavor， we would discard wining and womanizing. If we have found contentment elsewhere， the worldly pleasures are all soils. Are they still worthy of pursuing？” This health-preserving theory nurtures ideas about the junzi， integrating Daoism into traditional conceptions of the junzi aesthetic.

Changes to the Junzi Personality Aesthetic?and Literary Ideas on Aesthetics [37]

In the Wei–Jin period and the Northern and Southern dynasties， theories on the junzi personality were permeated with literary ideas， facilitating literature and aesthetics at that time with highlights distinctly different from those in the Han dynasty. The junzi as the practitioner of literary writing was endowed with greater self-consciousness. To be specific， literature was not yet seen as an instrument to perfect ethical relations and enhances dogmatic teaching. Instead， it is the representation of human values in the junzi. In his preface to An Early Collection of My Poems [前錄]， Cao Zhi 曹植 （192–232） presented an interpretation for the sacred function of literary writing and took it as the emblem of the junzi：

The writing of a junzi is lofty as a mountain， rolls as do floating clouds， plain as autumn grass， and flourishing as spring flowers. It is overflowing and shining， even prevailing over the “Elegance” [雅] and “Odes” [頌] sections in the Book of Songs. At an early age， I loved writing rhymed-prose， which was in vogue at that time. I gave full play to my hobby and wrote an abundance of prose. Although I wrote them according to the genres， there were still many flaws. Then I made elisions and came up with an extra edition titled An Early Collection of My Poems with seventy-eight pieces in it.

Some other conservative literati used the Confucian idea of the junzi personality to evaluate literary creation， attacking contemporary versification for deviating from the sagely Way. In the Southern dynasty， Pei Ziye 裴子野 （469–530）， in his Discourse on Carving Insects [雕蟲論]， enshrined the four part division of the Book of Odes and its six categories （namely， feng 風， ya 雅， song 頌， fu 賦， bi 比， and xing 興）， speaking highly of them as “accumulating the vital stuff from the four directions， manifesting the intent of the junzi， championing the virtuous and admonishing evil， serving as the ground of the kingly teachings.” He opposed the luxury and flamboyance of the Poetry of South [楚辭] and the rhyme-prose of the Han， denouncing them as the trivial skills of carving insects and attempts to dismantle the teaching function of poetry.

In this era， the prominent figure who used the ideal of junzi personality as the critical criterion of literary theory is Liu Xie 劉勰 （ca. 465–532）. His Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons is extensive and elaborate， integrating ideas from Confucianism， Daoism， and Buddhism. Discourse on the junzi personality constitutes a significant part of this book， whilst the theme of discourse on the interrelationship between junzi and literature runs throughout the entire text. The Chinese word junzi appears nineteen times throughout the book， showing how deep an influence the Confucian idea of junzi has exerted on Liu Xie. The idea of junzi is one of the important benchmarks when he wrote this book. In the Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons， the junzi is responsible for tracing the Origin to the Way， venerating the sage， and modeling on the classics. In view of Liu Xie， literary writing is not an instrument or a means for entertainment and recreation. Rather， it is an commitment to a sacred duty. In “The Capacity of a Vessel” [程器]， he claims，

A junzi keeps his ability hidden， and waits for the right moment to act. One who aims at achievement in affairs of state should on the one hand strive for perfection in cultivating the excellence of the inner man and on the other be able to express this inner excellence externally in beautiful patterns. In other words， he should have a nature like cedar and a trunk like camphor-laurel. His purpose in writing will be to conduct affairs of state; and when he is asked to shoulder heavy responsibilities， he will be as dependable as a pillar or a beam. When frustrated， he will cultivate his inner excellence in retirement and immortalize it in words; when in office， he will take advantage of the opportunity to achieve success. Such a writer will meet the requirements set up for scholars in the “Timber of the Rottlera” [梓材] section.

When in isolation， Liu Xie retreated into a monastery to sort through Buddhist scriptures; when in office， he adapted to the times and made efforts to attain political success. His emphasis on the junzis keeping his ability hidden and waiting for the right moment to act when chance comes also reflected his ideals.

In his preface of Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons， Liu Xie noted，

In his appearance， man resembles heaven and earth， and he is naturally endowed with five talents. . . . His physical form may be as fragile as the grasses and trees， but his fame is more substantial than metal or stone. Therefore， a junzi， in his relationship with the people of the world， aims at establishing both his character and his words. So it is not that I simply happen to be fond of argument; it is that I cannot do otherwise than write.

His view is a demonstration of the idea of self-awareness， popular since the Wei–Jin period， and compatible with the traditional notion of the “Three Immortalities” （san buxiu 三不朽）. The raison dêtre for writing the Literary Heart and the Carving of Dragons is to pursue this life goal and to emulate the writing spirit of Mencius. In the chapter “Speculative Writings” [諸子]， he says，

Speculative writings are works by men who have entered into the realm of the Way and have seen the truth. Of these men， those of the highest order aim at the establishment of virtue; men of a lower order seek to immortalize their convictions in words. The masses of people， living in herds， are plagued by the rejection that they are lost in oblivion among their many petty activities; and even the junzi， in finding a place for themselves in the world， are vexed that their names and virtues are not known.

In the “Evidence from the Sage” [征圣] chapter， Liu Xie gives more definite ideas about junzis writings： “Ideas adequately expressed by words combined into literary forms—sincere sentiments embodied in masterly expressions.” The chapter “Laudatory Address and Statement on Government Affairs” [章表] says， “Respectful in the narrative of details， and neatly ordered， in putting first things first and last things last. When endowed with literary talent， a junzi produces works which are truly works of art.” Liu Xie continued to directly propose that writing as a genre expressed the mind of its author and revealed his or her inner world， and then a distinction could be made between junzi and petty man. Liu Xie boasted that the writing of a junzi fulfilled the role of an exemplar for peer writers. In this way， he tried to rectify writing trends such as falsification， abuse， and overindulgence and return to traditions of elegance and rectitude. Writing specifically for each genre of writings， Liu Xie adopted an attitude to each of them by referring to the requirements for a junzi. In the case of the treatises and discussion genre， Liu Xie claims，

In a discourse， it is as if one were splitting wood; the main thing is to split it according to its grain. When the axe is sharp it often cuts across the grain; just so， when ones language is clever， he often violates reason in order to rationalize and reach an understanding. Sometimes a discourse may appear to be a clever piece on the score of its language， but in view of the evidence it adduces it will be seen to be absurd. Only the junzi is able to comprehend the desire of the people of the world. Why should one resort to sophistry in writing a discourse？

Literary appreciation is an important means to the realization of literary value. Without the involvement of literary appreciation， the intact value of a literary work would be undermined. In this light， Liu Xie attached a great emphasis to the capability of appreciation. Nevertheless， the capability of appreciation in turn depends on the spiritual loftiness of a persons personality. In “An Understanding Critic” [知音] chapter， Liu Xie writes，

However， because popular taste is confused， profound writings have come to be discarded， and superficial styles have gained popularity. This is why Zhuangzi ridiculed the tune “The Breaking of the Willow” [折楊]， and Song Yu 宋玉 （ca. 298–222 BCE） was struck with melancholy at the [forlorn] fate of “White Snow” [白雪]. Long ago Qu Yuan 屈原 （ca. 340–278 BCE） said， “There is in my inner nature both form and substance， but the people do not know their wonderful patterns.” Indeed， an understanding critic alone is capable of seeing what is [inwardly] wonderful. Yang Xiong 揚雄 （53 BCE–18 CE） once called himself a lover of literary works which are both profoundly erudite and beautiful. From this statement it is apparent that Yang did not indulge in the superficial and shallow. Only those with deep knowledge and profound insight will [give the author an] experience of inner joy， which experience may be compared to the warmth people feel while ascending a terrace in the spring， or to the feeling of a wayfarer halting his step for music and viands. For it is said that the orchid， which is the most fragrant thing in the country， will give forth its full scent only when worn; and similarly， literary works， which too are national treasures， must be appreciated to display their beauty. May those who consider themselves understanding critics consider these words well.

Obviously， Liu Xie expected a junzi to be the understanding critic of excellent works， and took the understanding critic as the ultimate channel to the realization of a literary works value.

The word junzi has almost become a synonym for exemplars in writing and aesthetic ideals in the Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons. This is no coincidence， but the projection of Liu Xies ideals for life. In other words， it is also the contribution made by Liu Xie to the Chinese junzi culture.

Coda [39]

The personality of junzi as a cultural heritage has been maintained up to the present day. As a spiritual legacy， through reflection and streamlining， we can discern that it hinges on the interaction between the individual and the collective. The junzi personality， despite being an ideal one， cannot but diverge from the true being and natural disposition of humans， inclining to a one-sided stress on moral restraints on personality， or distorting individual personality with despotism and atrocities. Or， there would emerge a herd of hypocrites， the social ethos would become polluted as well. This social mode is morbid， like the fictional Junzi Kingdom in Flowers in Mirror [鏡花緣]， a novel by Li Ruzhen 李汝珍 （ca. 1763–1830）， where two-faced hypocrites were pervasive. That is why Confucius and Mencius made derogatory remarks on xiangyuan 鄉愿 （politicians who go against the Way to obtain the praise of the people） and ningren 佞人 （sycophants）. In the fields of literature and aesthetics， an outstanding work is derived from both emotional evocation and intentional articulation， a synthesis of the Way of nature and the teachings of the Six Arts， and of authentic depiction and the aesthetic education. The value of the Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons consists in the corroboration of this point. The transformations in the aesthetic of the junzi personality and the features of artistic activities during the period from the Han down to the Northern and Southern dynasties can shed a heuristic light on the construction of todays moral personality.

Bibliography of Cited Translations

Ames， Roger T.， and David L. Hall， trans. Focusing the Familiar： A Translation and Philosophical Interpretation of the Zhongyong. Honolulu： University of Hawaii Press， 2001.

Baynes， Cary F.， and Richard Wilhelm， trans. The I Ching or Book of Changes. 3rd ed. Princeton， NJ： Princeton University Press， 1977.

Eno， Robert， trans. The Analects of Confucius： An Online Teaching Translation. https：// chinatxt.sitehost.iu.edu/Analects_of_Confucius_（Eno-2015）.pdf， accessed August 6， 2021.

Hutton， L. Eric， trans. Xunzi： The Complete Text. Princeton， NJ： Princeton University Press， 2014.

Lau， D. C. 劉殿爵， trans. The Analects （Chinese–English Edition） [論語（中英文對照）]. Beijing： Zhonghua Book Company， 2008.

Lynn， Richard J.， trans. The Classic of Changes： A New Translation of the I Ching as Interpreted by Wang Bi. New York： Columbia University Press， 1994.

Ryden， Edmund， trans. Daodejing. New York： Oxford University Press， 2008.

Shih， Vincent Yu-chung， trans. The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons. Rev. ed. Hong Kong： Chinese University of Hong Kong Press， 2015.

Translated by Liu Huawen