The Ambivalence of Creation: Debates Concerning Innovation and Artifice in Early China

The Ambivalence of Creation Debates Concerning Innovation and Artifice in Early China

Michael Puett

STANFO RD UNIVE RSITY I'RESS • STANFOR D, CALIFO RNIA

2001

fV\;~\ K0

DS' 11v1 ,~fI~

tOOl

Stanford University Press Stanford, California by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

C lOOI

Primed in the United States of America on add·free, archival-quality paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Puett, Michael. The ambivale nce of creation; debates concerning innovation and artifice in early China I Michael 1. Puett. p. cm. Revis ion of the author's thesis (doctoral) - University of Chicago, 1994. Indudes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8047-)6l3-5 (a1k. paper) I. China- Civilization-History. I. Tide: Debates concerning innovation and anifice in early China. II. Title. DS71;1.1'794

1;001

951-dC:tl

00-0491;90

Designed by Janet Wood Typeset by Tseng Information Systems in 10.5/14 Adobe Garamond Original priming lOOI ust figure below indicates xear of this printi ng: 10

~

~

~

~

05

~

~

m

01

To my parents

Acknowledgments

An earlier draft of this book was submitted as a doclOral dissertation to the Depanmcm of Anthropology at the University of Chicago. I would like to extend my heanfelt thanks to the members of my dissertation comminee: Professors Edward Shaughnessy, Anthony C. Yu, Marshall Sahlins, and Paul Friedrich. Each of these mentors helped me in speci6cand unique ways. Professor Edward Shaughnessy provided invaluable training in the rigors of reading early C hinese texts and helped to solidify my basic conviction that there need be no conflict between close readings of texts and broader concerns. Professor Anthony C. Yu was a decisive influence not only in helping me

[Q

conceptualize specific

issues in the comparison of China and early Greece, but also in revealing to me me importance of a cosmopolitan approach to scholarship in general. Professor Marshall Sahlins

Wa5

a rremendous infJuence in helping me to approach

the study of cultures. My indebtedness to his work is apparent th roughout. And Professor Paul Friedrich emphasized the importance of conceptualizing the project in tcrms of the actions and thoughts of specific individuals. Overall , [ Wa5

blessed with four mcnrors whose works are a constant source of inspira-

tion for mc. All four scholars have taught me more than I could possibly express here. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Professor Li Ling of Beijing University for advice, stimulating conversations, and generous hospitality during my stay in China during the year 1993-94.

'"

viii

Acknowledgments More recendy. J profited immeasurably fro m conversations with my colleagues at Harvard University. I would likC' to thank in particular Peter Bol. Leo lC'e. StephC'n Owen, Benjamin Schwam, and Tu Wei-mingo All help to creatC' a stimulating C'n vironment for studying and teaching Chinese thought. The manuscri pt itself has been improved dramaticaHy by the advice of sevC'ral key pC'oplC'. David Keighdq offered extensive criticism and comments, as d id an anonymous readcr for Stanford Univcrsity Press. To both I am deeply gratcfu!. I would also likC' to express my gratitudc and admiration for the editorial team at Stanford Univcrsity Press. Helcn Tartar was an exemplary cditor throughout the process. and Pamela MacFarland Holway and Janct Mowery wC'rC' truly invaluable in improving the manuscript. Financial support was providcd bya gcnC'rous grant from the Mellon Fellowships in the Humanities, as well as a Dissertation Writing Grant from the Centcr for East Asian Studies of the Univcrsity of Chicago and a National RC'sourcc Summer Fellowship. My yC'u in BC'ij ing was funded by thc CommittcC' on Scholarly Communication with the Pcoplc's Republic of China. I am indebtcd to all of thC'sC' grantors. without whosC' support this book could nevC'r havc bC'en written. EarliC'r vC'rsions of ChaptC'rs 2 and 3 appC'arC'd as "NaturC' and Artifice: Debates in Late Warring Scates China Concerning the Creation of Culture" and as "Sages, Ministers. and Rebels: Narratives from Early China Concerning the Ini(ial Creation of thC' Sratc," both in the Harvard jounulJ ofAsiatic Studies (57. no. 2 (December 19971: 47 1-5 18, and 58, no. 2 (December 1998): 425-79, rC'spectively). I am grateful to the Ha rvardjournal ofkiatic Studies for permission to republish these articles in their present form. I also wish to express my deep gratitude to the numerous friends who gave me so much help along the way. There are too many to thank by name, but I am especially gratcful to Brad Basslcr, Bruce and Taeko Brooks. Eileen Chow. Scott Cook, Mark CsikszcntmihaJyi. Paul Goldin, C hristoph H arbsmeier, P. J. Ivanhoe, Tina Lu. Andrew MC'yer, Barbara Mirth. W illard Peterson, Sarah Queen, Lisa Raphals, Harold Roth. Indira Satyendra. Haun Saussy. Michael ScOtt, Laura Skosey, David Spindler, Tim Wesron. and John Zeimer. Finally, I wish ro express my profound gratitude for the support and encouragement given ro me by all of the members of my family. M.P.

Contents

Introduction I.

Domesticating the Landscape: Notions of Ancestors and Innov:uion in the Bronze Age

2.

The C raft of Humanity: Debates over Nature and Culture in Warring States C hina

J.

Sages, Ministers. and Rebels: Narratives of the Emergence of the State

4·

The Creation of Empire: The Emergcnce and Consolidation of Imperial Rule in C hina

,.

J9

'4'

Ine l ragedy of Creation : Sima Qian's Reconstruction of [he Rise of Empire in Early C hina

' 77

Conclusion

UJ

Appendix: The Semantics of Creation

Notn Bibliography [nde