 |
|
Title: The Analects of Confucius : A Philosophical Translation (Classics of Ancient China)
ISBN: 0345401549
Author:
Roger T. Ames
Publicate Date: 1998-09-29
Publish: 1998-09-29
List Price: $27.00
Average Customer Rating: 4.5
Format: Hardcover
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $12.58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: TOO scholarly
This version may be historically accurate, but like historically accurate versions of the Bible, it is boring because of this fact. I prefer more soul-ful renditions, such as the Penguin translation. Worth having along with another more colorful translation.
|
2: excellent resource
What an excellent resource for Asian studies in general. The translation is great to compare with Lau et al. And the other material sheds light on previous interpretations of the text and context.
|
3: Very interesting, historical, and different from anything else
This is a nicely presented book, containing over 325 pages. The
graphics are well done (cover, and layout of the text within, including
the chinese original phrases, for those reading Mandarin). There's a lot
of footnotes in the back, stimulating further research, and backing up
the interpretations contained within, as well as an appendix with more
material, that is intended to add context to Confucius' outlook on
societal relationships and behavioral beliefs.
Next, I had to admit that each page has different scenarios of interaction
among people, or philosophical reflections, such that, for some, this
book is a cure for insomnia, no doubt. The fact that Europeans and North
Americans have not been taught to read the Chinese alphabet or the language, further beckons understanding.
Also, the 65 page introduction to the Analects is surely relevant
as the author justifies himself, of some choices in terminology as
compared to other translations and the works of previous tranlators.
A read here on Amazon didn't understand how an archeological find could
bring higher understanding of these classics from Ancient China. Well,
the answer resides in the manuscripts. Much like the Holy Bible was
discovered in several languages (Greek, and also near-Hebraic languages,
for example) the meaning of the texts and the final translation will
depend a lot on on the ability of the underlying language to express
human thought, and the scholar's ability to read it, understand it,
interpret it, and translate it for English speakers, no doubt.
For $10 and change, this is a not a bad work to own.
|
4: Sheds new light on Confucius
Confucius has been much maligned since he is perceived as wanting a static rigid society. This translation attempts to show that that is not really true. The translators and editors explain in the foreword that the Chinese language is dynamic, and therefore Confucius sayings does not reflect a static society, but rather a society in a constant flux. It does come out that Confucius will not tolerate revolution, but he does accept evolution. He is not preaching a static society, but rather that all development should build on the previous.
While he stresses the importance of ritual, he also hammers in that ritual must be combined with warmth, caring, and even humour. A more gentle, less rigid, Confucius appears in this translation.
Lastly, I think Confucianism relates to Daoism as Shaolin relates to t'ai ch'i (or Bruce Lee to Yang Cheng Fu): on is concerned with the external, and one with the internal. It is just a matter of which way you chose. Ones you have achieved mastery, there is no difference.
|
5: error in the previous review
Daomonkey's reviews exhibit detailed knowledge in Chinese philosophy, and I agree with many of his criticisms. But he has made a small error in his review of this book, which is important to note.
This book is NOT by Hall and Ames, and thus does not show the proclivity towards 'pragmatization' that runs throughout their stimulating work. Rather, it is by Ames and ROSEMONT, a philosopher who has published extensively on topics in Chinese philosophy. You will find little by way of "speculative acrobatics and obsolete wheedlings" here.
The unconventional nature of the translation may seem awkward at first but repays careful reading; Ames and Rosemont provide good arguments in the introduction for adopting them.
(Also, the translation by Slingerland he mentions, published by Hackett, is indeed a fine translation with much running commentary.)
|
|
|
|
|
