Classical Chinese is an extremely concise and highly ambiguous language. Since any given line can have a wide range of possible and equally valid meanings, there can in fact be no such thing as a definitive interpretation, and hence, as Burton Watson has pointed out, no such thing as a definitive translation, although Arthur Waley's scholarly reading of this important Confucian classic is possibly as close to 'definitive' as we're ever likely to get.

What we may overlook when considering Confucianism, however, is that it represented an ideology very much like Marxism, one imposed by an all-powerful bureaucracy on a not-always willing population. As ideological documents of the highest importance, since they served to justify the existence of the Imperial system, works such as the 'Analects' were often engraved on stone.

And it's interesting to note that, in the many popular uprisings which have riven China, the stone tablets and drums on which the 'Analects' and other Classics were engraved often became the first target of the mob's fury. They were regularly smashed and pulverized, only to be re-engraved on new stones when the Mandarinate re-established its authority.

In addition, it goes without saying that the Communist Party, which is as it were China's modern 'Mandarinate,' also takes a very dim view of the Chinese Classics, seeing them as relics of a detested feudalistic past, a detestation not perhaps untinged with envy, since the Mandarinate was the most efficient, successful and long-lasting bureaucracy in human history.

None of this, perhaps, need bother the modern reader as opposed to the scholar, since we go to these old books to discover in them what relevance they may have for our lives today, and there is much real wisdom in Confucius that anyone can benefit from.

Arthur Waley's edition, while scholarly, is not so cluttered with scholarly impedimenta as to be unapproachable by the general reader, and is written in a style that remains relatively modern. After a brief Preface, he gives us an interesting and informative 66-page Introduction. Then follows his extensively annotated translation, and the book is rounded out with an Index.

Though Waley was undoubtedly a brilliant translator, I was weaned on Ezra Pound's more lively and idiosyncratic version, and although I've read and compared both translations, the lines that tend to stick in my mind are invariably those of Pound, lines such as:

"He said : A proper man is inclusive, not sectary; the small man is sectarian and not inclusive" (Book II, xiv).

For the same passage Waley gives:

"The Master said, A gentleman can see a question from all sides without bias. The small man is biased and can see a question only from one side" (p.91).

Both, so far as I can see, mean pretty much the same thing, although Waley is a bit more prosy and takes almost twice as many words to say it. Pound's edition, besides its greater punch, also has the merit of being relatively free of distracting footnotes, and of including two additional and very powerful texts, along with beautiful reproductions of them from the stone Classics.

Waley and Pound give us Confucius as filtered through two highly intelligent though different sensibilities, both of them valuable. My advice would be to read both. For those who may be interested, here are details of Pound's edition:

CONFUCIUS : THE GREAT DIGEST, THE UNWOBBLING PIVOT, THE ANALECTS. Translation and Commentary by Ezra Pound. Stone Text from rubbings supplied by William Hawley. 288 pp. New York: New Directions, 1951 and Reissued.

It is in Pound's translation of 'The Great Digest' that we find the striking line: "If the root be in confusion, nothing will be well governed" (p.33). And who would want to miss a line that has such a powerful relevance to the world that we see around us today ?


The first stop on the Way   October 10, 1999
 10 out of 13 found this review helpful

Perhaps the best introduction to the Confucian philosophy. Extensive footnotes and explanations of key concepts. Language slightly archaic but still clear. Wade-Giles romanization.