JIA Guangben, CAO Mingsheng
As a classic title of late poetry, “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty” is well known in academic circles, and a lot of research on Wang Pengyun, Zheng Wenzhuo, Zhu Zumou, and Kuang Zhouyi four masters has emerged. However, for the origin of the title, the academic circles lack an in-depth exploration and a diachronic and synchronic reflection. Although the title “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty” can reflect the appearance of late Ci science to a certain extent, the academic circles' excessive respect for this title is undoubtedly a kind of cover for the diversity of late Ci circles. In fact, there are still many key points about the generation and evolution of this title that are worth examining. Based on existing literature, this paper reveals a clue about the evolution of Ci in the late Qing Dynasty by combing the process of “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty”, which is helpful for a more comprehensive investigation of Ci history and Ci science in the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China.
After carefully combing the relevant poems, postscripts, diaries, letters, local chronicles, and other documents, this paper finds that the formation process of the title of “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty” in the late Qing Dynasty actually has a very complicated background of the evolution of the pattern of Ci circles. The evolution of the title is closely related to the active period of the four masters in the Ci circle, which roughly presents the successive changes from “two masters” (Wang and Zheng) to “three masters” (Wang, Zheng, and Zhu), and then to “four masters” (Wang, Zheng, Zhu, and Kuang).
This paper attempts to expand existing research in the following aspects. First, there is no special article to comprehensively discuss the origin of the title “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty”. Based on existing literature, this paper expounds from perspectives of the north and south regions, the singing of Ci clubs, the communication of Ci writers, the selection and compilation of Ci, the concept of Ci school, the path of creation, etc., trying to restore the process of the title from “two masters” to “three masters”, and finally to “four masters”. Second, the current academic discussion on the “Four Ci Schools in the late Qing Dynasty” mainly focuses on the internal logic, but has not solved the key problem of where the title came from, that is, what is the theoretical origin and practical direction of its formation? In addition, there are many recent Ci circles, why the “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty” is only valued by the current Ci academic circle? In fact, the title “Four Ci Schools in Late Qing Dynasty” is based on the theory system of Changzhou Ci School, which is closely related to the concept of “Four Ci Schools of Song Dynasty” of Zhouji, and derived from the title of “Four Ci Schools of the Republic of China” and “Four Female Poets of the Republic of China”. These problems have not been fully paid attention to by academia. Third, one of the disputes in the history of Ci in the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China is that Long Yusheng added Wen Tingshi to the sequence of “four Ci schools”. The academic circle often tries to explain from the perspective of Ci school, which neglects and covers up Long Yusheng's Ci study purview and practical intention of reverting to Su Shi and Xin Qiji, and trying to reverse the recent obscure Ci style with bold and unconstrained sound. This paper clarifies Long Yusheng's intention of Ci study and reveals his intention of using the title “four masters” as Su and Xin. Fourth, this paper focuses on the possible dislocation between discourse construction and the truth of Ci history, as well as the misreading and obscuring. In fact, there are distinct stages in the classicization process of the four schools, which have not been paid attention to in previous studies. However, the current academic circle is used to framing the four schools with factions and overemphasizing the commonality of the four schools, which will cover up the distinct willingness of the four schools to break through the factions and the differences in the philosophy of Ci studies.
Through the diachronic and synchronic analysis of “Four Ci Schools in the Late Qing Dynasty”, we can not only analyze the formation process of the Ci system, but also help to examine the evolution of the recent Ci circles and Ci studies. The development of Ci history in the Qing Dynasty has many clues and multiple dimensions. Only by taking into account the discourse construction and the truth of Ci history can we restore the original appearance of the recent Ci circle to the greatest extent.