| Hao Jing’s Trivial remarks on Trivial remarks on The Garden of Cultivation is an important poetical work in the late Ming Dynasty,in which the criticism of the Book of Songs is analyzed systematically and thoroughly.Hao Jing’s poetic thoughts are influenced by the background of The Times.In the Song and Ming dynasties,the literary interpretation of the Book of Songs impacted the neo-Confucianism tradition.The revival and decline of the Study of the Book of Songs promoted the new development of the study of the Book of Songs.In the middle and later period of the Ming Dynasty,the trend of thought with emphasis on emotion broke through the hypocrisy and cruelty of Neo-Confucianism,and individuals and literature regained redemption.These three aspects constitute the theoretical context of Hao Jing’s criticism of Trivial remarks on The Garden of Cultivation and The Book of Songs.Hao Jing holds that there are two aspects to the nature of the main character in the Book of Songs,one is the personal nature of the characters in the Book of Songs,the other is the nature of the satirical nature.Hao Jing discusses in detail the reasons why these two temperaments are often expressed in male and female temperaments and are often expressed in female tones.At the same time,he also puts forward the judgment of non-temperament and the criterion of distinguishing true and false temperament,which is the development and improvement on the basis of "Preface to Mao Poems".Hao Jing holds that the rites and music in the Book of Songs are interdependent,and the music,poetry and rites complement each other,which shows the unique charm of Chinese classical poetics.Hao Jing inherited and made a breakthrough in the Confucian view of poetic education.He clarified the connotation of "elegance" and "zheng" from the three directions of poetic record,poetic sound and poetry,and differentiated the poetic style from the word number and combination of the poem,transforming the Confucian discourse of "gentleness and sincerity" into an aesthetic discourse creatively.Hao Jing reinterprets the important proposition of "six meanings".Hao Jing holds that all poems are "wind" and "wind" has six meanings.Hao Jing emphasizes that "wind" is the combination of the essence of music’s tone and the function of "Wind"."Elegant" played in the court,alcohol on which is.The core of "Ode" lies in ease."Fu" is a direct description of things and feelings.The "bi" in The Book of Songs is similar to the "image" in the Book of Changes."Xing" is the key to poetry,which is "xing" when touched.This is almost a final conclusion of Zhu Zi "six righteousness" said tho save true.At the same time,he also advocated the theory of "three meanings of a poem",that a good poem should be Fu,Bi and Xing at the same time.Hao Jing has always used the Book of Songs as a model to evaluate the poems of the past dynasties,showing the characteristics of "taking Poetry as the style".Taking the Book of Songs as the criterion,he mainly criticized Yuefu for its lack of solemnity and gentleness in ancient poetry,while for modern poetry,he mainly criticized Tang poetry for its "elegance".In the two different interpretation paths,namely,annotation of the Book of Songs and literary interpretation of the Book of Songs,Hao Jing showed the characteristics of the interpretation of the Book of Songs that compromised the classics and literature.He not only saw the abuses of "Song Studies" in commenting on Poetry,but also critically inherited the tradition of "Sinology" in commenting on Poetry,showing the characteristics of respecting Sinology of the Book of Songs and belittling Song Studies of the Book of Songs.Hao Jing’s criticism of Trivial remarks on The Garden of Cultivation not only influenced the study of the Book of Poetry in Ming and Qing Dynasties,but also boosted the poetry criticism in Ming and Qing Dynasties.as the representative,studied the poetry of the late Ming Dynasty,which is of great value to the development of the study of poetry and literary theory.In addition,Hao Jing’s theory can be used for reference in today’s literary criticism. |