The Modern Significance of Chinese Calligraphy

A Dialogue on Ancient Script and Calligraphy between LIU Zhengcheng & RAO Zongyi

Rao Zongyi (Chair Professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Director of the Institute of Chinese Culture); Liu Zhengcheng: (then Deputy SecretaryGeneral of the China Calligraphers Association, Editor-in-Chief of Chinese Calligraphy (《中国书法》), now Editor-in-Chief of Complete Works of Chinese Calligraphy (《中国书法全集》),President of the International Calligraphy Association)

【The dialogue between Liu Zhengcheng and renowned sinologist Rao Zongyi explores Chinese calligraphy's cultural and artistic essence, highlighting its enduring significance. Rao, revered for his extensive contributions to Chinese studies, discusses how calligraphy’s unique pictographic nature intertwines form, sound, and meaning, creating a “Chinese Character Tree” rich with cultural depth. Contrasting Chinese script with Western phonetic alphabets, Rao emphasizes that calligraphy reflects a person's spirit, not merely visual appeal, distinguishing it from other art forms. They consider the limitations of Western perspectives in evaluating calligraphy, advocating for its free, individualized evolution. Rao argues that calligraphy transcends decoration, with each era's style reflecting its unique values, cautioning against entirely abstract representations disregarding tradition. The dialogue underscores calligraphy's role in preserving and expressing cultural identity, revealing a historical reverence and a call for adaptive continuity in modern times.】

The renowned sinologist, Rao Zongyi (饶宗颐), passed away on February 6, 2018, at the age of 101. During his lifetime, he was an honorary professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Nanjing University, among other institutions, and the president of the Xiling Seal Art Society (西泠印社). His scholarship spanned virtually all areas of Chinese studies, achieving remarkable accomplishments, and he was proficient in Sanskrit. He was often mentioned alongside Ji Xianlin (季羡林), with the academic community referring to them as "Southern Rao and Northern Ji."

To commemorate Rao Zongyi, we present a dialogue between Liu Zhengcheng (刘正成) and Rao Zongyi from 1999 on "Ancient Script and Calligraphy." As Liu Zhengcheng stated in the preface of his book "Dialogues on Calligraphy Art: Liu Zhengcheng's Calligraphy

Dialogues" (《晤对书艺:刘正成书法对话录》):

"In the modest study-cum-living room of Rao Zongyi's apartment on the Mid-Levels in Hong Kong, our conversation suddenly brought Chinese calligraphy into a broad historical and cultural perspective. I felt as though I had entered a dazzling treasury. At that time, Rao Zongyi wanted to show me a photograph of the Rosetta Stone (《罗塞塔》) he mentioned during our talk. Although he couldn’t find it then, I found it after returning to Beijing. His comparisons between ancient Egyptian and Babylonian cultures and the issues of script and calligraphy opened my eyes to the common features of human artistic origins and allowed me to gather many 'fruits' from the

'tree of Chinese characters.'"

Time: May 1999

Place: Rao Zongyi’s residence on the Mid-Levels, Hong Kong Participants:

I.  The Chinese Character

Tree—The Successful Development of Chinese Pictographs

Liu: From your talk, it’s clear that they used letters early on, moving towards purely phonetic script, while Chinese pictographs continued developing.

Rao: They couldn’t avoid using letters because "Sumerian" complexity was unmanageable. For example, a type of "Elam" pictographic script was incredibly complex, representing "Shu-Shi-na-ak" (meaning "Susa deity") with intricate pictograms. This complexity made such scripts unviable, leading to their replacement by simpler letters. China valued script more. If our ancestors had adopted letters, calligraphers would’ve lost their livelihood (laughs)!

Liu: If that happened, Chinese tradition would’ve been destroyed.

Rao: Western letters are entirely phonetic systems. Even ancient Greek civilization abandoned cumbersome pictographic letters.

Liu: Do you think the long-lasting pictographic nature of Chinese script is inseparable from its abstract beauty?

Rao: Firstly, each character has one sound, with pictophonetic construction predominant. This combination preserves the pictorial beauty while maintaining a connection with language, forming a literary system that integrates form and sound. Chinese script, thus, doesn’t chase linguistic changes. Secondly, Chinese political life has always emphasized applying script to decrees and rites rather than language. Therefore, language development is relatively distant from the script. Hence, the Chinese script controls language, keeping "script and language separate" ( 书同文 ). The notion of "unifying script" ostensibly standardizes character forms, but it actually prevents script from changing with language. Letters are entirely phonetic, while Chinese characters are only partially phonetic, keeping the script non-phonetic. This integration of art, literature, and the beautiful combination of form and sound has created a flourishing "Chinese Character Tree" (汉字树), with rich branches and leaves. The intertwined relationship of script, literature, and art (calligraphy) constitutes the greatest charm and distinctive feature of Chinese culture.

Liu: The New Culture Movement separated script and language. Did the vernacular movement have any negative effects?

Rao: The vernacular movement narrowed the gap between script and language, which was progress. However, if traditional excellence is considered a burden and completely negated, that’s entirely wrong.

Liu: Can modern prose compare aesthetically to the prose of the Tang and Song masters?

Rao: It depends on the perspective. The perspectives of today and ancient times differ and shouldn’t be confused. One cannot use modern standards to judge the ancients and vice versa.

Liu: Modern calligraphers rarely write in vernacular; most write classical poetry and prose. Does this indicate that classical texts have greater capacity within the same number of characters? Classical texts may have richer connotations and extrinsic meanings, while vernacular texts are more limited.

Rao: Not necessarily! But ancient works are inexhaustible!

Liu: Today’s conversation seems to focus on two main points: the mystery of Chinese script’s pictorial nature and its advantages in integrating form, sound, and meaning.

Rao: Another advantage is that character evolution is closely related to calligraphy. Each era's calligraphy has its characteristics. Our works express the author's feelings and may resonate with viewers.

Liu: The Han dynasty summarized the "Six Principles" ( 六书 ) as the ancient rules for character creation.

Rao: The "Six Principles" were already applied in early oracle bone inscriptions. By the Yin (Shang) dynasty (殷代), Chinese script was mature, which enabled its inheritance and development. If it were as complex as foreign scripts, it might have switched to letters long ago.

Liu: Some say the "Six Principles" were the Han people’s speculation. Is that correct?

Rao: The Han people didn’t speculate; they summarized the principles, though not comprehensively. Calling it speculation is due to partial understanding. We shouldn’t underestimate our ancestors!

Liu: You mean skepticism about ancient texts should be cautious?

Rao: Being too clever is harmful!

Liu: Li Xueqin (李学勤) said this century is an era of skepticism about ancient texts. We need to move beyond it.

Rao: I’ve long said skepticism is acceptable but shouldn’t lead to outright denial. That’s the scientific attitude.

Liu: You believe the "Six Principles" were applied in the Yin dynasty and are a key reason for the Chinese script’s vitality.

Rao: Exactly. That’s why it flourished and remained popular.

Liu: Chinese script expresses profound meanings with simple graphics.

Rao: And its meanings grow richer over time!

Liu: You’ve studied Chinese and Western scripts for years. Comparatively, is Chinese calligraphy’s charm mainly due to its unique script?

Rao: Calligraphy has several charms, with the script being a significant aspect.

Liu: Some advocate for "modernizing calligraphy," even suggesting removing Chinese characters and replacing them with abstract forms.

Rao: What is self-created abstraction? I must loudly warn: Be cautious!

Liu: We shouldn’t discard the most valuable aspects. Chinese characters have both beautiful forms and unique meanings. Completely abstract calligraphy would be the end!

Rao: Not just calligraphy, but many classical languages also stem from script.

II. The Modern Significance of Calligraphy—Expressing a Person's Spirit

Liu: Calligraphy is very popular on the mainland. People from all walks of life are involved. I’ve noticed many in Hong Kong are also engaged in calligraphy. What do you think is

ART REFLECTIONS

What is the modern significance of this traditional art?

Rao: The main significance is that calligraphy can express a person’s spirit. Achieving such a level in calligraphy is challenging. Treating calligraphy merely as decoration is wrong. Calling it "visual art" is problematic because calligraphy isn’t just visual; it primarily involves the mind and soul. No great calligrapher’s work is just about visual appeal!

Liu: As the saying goes, "the handwriting reflects the person." In my article "The Tendency of Calligraphy to Become Artistic" (《中国书法的美术化倾向》), I mentioned the influence of art on Chinese calligraphy, but using artistic concepts to define calligraphy is problematic.

Rao: We shouldn’t use purely Western concepts to discuss calligraphy. Literature and art are about the soul and personality. I read your study on Huang Daozhou (黄道周); it’s excellent! His work reflects his spirit and personality. All great calligraphers are like that. Wang Duo (王铎), despite being a "second minister," was a great poet, which is why his calligraphy was so good.

Art is not just about writing a few characters. Writing a few characters alone doesn’t make an artist. I don’t believe it!

Liu: Su Dongpo (苏东坡) said, "Ancient scholars discussed calligraphy along with the person's life; if not an outstanding person, their skill, though excellent, wasn’t valued."

Rao: Exactly! We must first discard the term "visual art" when discussing calligraphy. Calligraphy isn’t just visual; otherwise, it would be no different from cartoons.

Liu: What are your impressions and views on the development and achievements of calligraphy on the mainland and in Hong Kong?

Rao: This question involves too much; different starting points yield different answers. Forgive me for not answering (laughs).

Liu: Not answering is an answer (laughs).

Rao: I think calligraphy can be regarded as art and is recognized by contemporary society and internationally. I’m very satisfied with that.

Liu: At the end of 1998, at the "Paris Chinese Calligraphy Art Exhibition" (“巴黎中国书法艺术大展”), President Chirac (希拉克总统) viewed the exhibition and wrote an inscription, praising Chinese calligraphy as the art of arts. He appreciated the beauty of calligraphy, showing its influence and charm. Professor Rao’s intention in not answering might be to let calligraphy develop freely. Is that correct?

Rao: Calligraphy should develop freely! Why? Because art cannot be generalized, everyone has unique insights and limitations. Dictating how they should create is unfeasible.

Liu: Calligraphers should express their opinions and not adhere to fixed formats but find their own paths.

Rao: Exactly! That’s the best way; everyone is happy.

Liu: Thank you.

(Professor Rao Zongyi's dialogue is included in his Collected Works of Rao Zongyi in the Twentieth Century.

(《饶宗颐二十世纪学术文集》).

Source: Humanities China, Fall Issue on October. 2024