Reticience - The Chinese Way
Kelvin Mok
hidden symbols in Chinese Life and Thought", Wolfram Eberhard
(translated from German by G.L. Campbell.) ISBN 0-415-00228-1.
Pg 11, 12. How is this reticence to be explained? Why this
reluctance to do or say what one wants to do or say? In this
connection I would like to point to one factor which seems to me to be
of great significance. Already in the days of Confucius (c. 500 BC)
we find the Chinese living huddled together in cramped quarters and in
crowded villages. In these villages the houses were as close to each
other as possible so as to leave the maximum amount of land for
agricultural purposes. In the towns the houses were just as closely
crowded together (as in European towns in the Middle Ages) so as to
keep the defensive radius to a minimum: the shorter the town walls,
the easier they were to defend.
The huts of the poorest people were made of straw and twigs; a
better class house had clay walls and a tiled roof. Until fairly
recently, the windows were simply openings in the walls, covered
perhaps with paper if one could afford it. Indoors, the rooms were
divided by thin walls - again, often of paper. Every word spoken in
such a room was audible in the rest of the house. There was no
question of separate rooms for individual members o the family, so no
one had any privacy. The people next door could also hear every word
that was spoken.
For many centuries, no less than five families were held
legally responsible for any crime or offence committed in their
immediate surroundings; and they had to account for themselves to the
state police in every detail: they could never plead ignorance. So,
it is not difficult to see why it was held advisable to say as little
as possible and to avoid anything that might lead to dissension within
the family or in its immediate neighbourhood. In the same way, in
art, overt statement of eroticism was avoided, lest others come to
harm. For these reasons too, landscape was preferred to portrait or
genre painting. Through adroit use of symbols, social content could
be infused into landscape painting: some beholders would miss the
point, others would understand and smile inwardly. Landscape appears
as a cosmos, ordered and harmonious: life was a question of give and
take, and if you wanted consideration from others, you had to show
them consideration. It is small wonder that the European travellers
and missionaries who visited China in the 16th, 17th and 18th
centuries described the Chinese as an 'old' people - tranquil and
serene in their wisdom, no doubt, but lifeless.
What the European travellers saw as 'lifelessness' was, in
fact, reticence: extreme reticence, as the Chinese always had to bear
in mind how others would react to any attitude they might ad t or any
opinion they might utter. Thus they came to form a society which used
symbolical forms and modes of expression, reinforced by ritual, to
integrate the individual with public order and morality.
It is significant that until very recently there was no word
in Chinese for what we call 'freedom'. either in the political or in
the philosophic sense. The word zi-you, which is still used for
'freedom', really means 'to be on one's own'. 'to be left alone' -
i.e. it has a negative connotation. Similarly, there was no word for
'individualism' and no word for 'equality of rights'. As the Chinese
saw it, no man is equal to another: he is older or younger than
another, superior to women in that he is male, or more highly placed
in the state hierarchy. 'Brotherliness', as it was grasped in early
Christianity, did not exist in China, for the individual saw himself
as a member of a family, and not obliged to do anything for someone
who had no familyof his own. The Confucian ethic which ruled society
prescribed man's duties but had little to say about his rights. The
permanent guide-line of education was to regulate behaviour so that it
should never offend against li - custom and propriety.
_____________________________________________________
This is perhaps the most accurate and complete observation of Chinese
behaviour I have ever come across. The above abstract from
Eberhard's book is part of 10 page Introduction on Chinese symbolism
that bears a close reading if one is to grasp why there is often a
disconnect in understanding the Chinese mind when apparently simple
discussions seem to carry so much unsuspected emotional baggage. As
one who has only half a foot in the old world I get whacked often
myself. If you do get hold of this book, 10 pages is an easy read and
very educational. Jim Walsh and many other non Chinese who frequent
this newsgroup, please make the effort. Take special note of the last
paragraph above.
The rest of the book describes Chinese symbols, their meanings and
implications. The plurals are used with a vengence as the same symbol
can have contary implications depending on the context in which it is
used. Eberhard's descriptions doesn't quite fully cover all the
guessed-at variations I have come to associate the symbol(s) with.
Believe me claiming ignorance here really got me out of many sticky
situations.