Reception History and Early Chinese Classics
Thus far, the study of early China and its texts is dominated by originalist approaches that try to excavate the authentic meaning of the classics. In this article, I promote the idea that a shift in focus from the intentions of the authors to the readers’ concrete responses could meaningfully accom...
Auteur principal: | |
---|---|
Type de support: | Électronique Article |
Langue: | Anglais |
Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Publié: |
MDPI
2022
|
Dans: |
Religions
Année: 2022, Volume: 13, Numéro: 12 |
Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Commentary
B Zhuangzi B Classics B Daoism B Laozi B originalism B reader response theory B Daode jing B Philology B Reception History |
Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Résumé: | Thus far, the study of early China and its texts is dominated by originalist approaches that try to excavate the authentic meaning of the classics. In this article, I promote the idea that a shift in focus from the intentions of the authors to the readers’ concrete responses could meaningfully accompany our research on the classics’ “original” meaning. Beyond merely illuminating the cultural and intellectual environments in which the various receptions were produced, such research on the classics’ myriad interpretations could also serve as a postcolonial catalyst, helping us identify field-specific trends and reading strategies that, often unnoticed, impact our understandings of early Chinese texts. In other words, reception history would not only give us insights into the history of early Chinese classics and the variegated worlds they inhabited. It would also help us illuminate and reflect upon the ways we researchers shape and preconfigure our visions of premodern China and its texts. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2077-1444 |
Contient: | Enthalten in: Religions
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.3390/rel13121224 |