PIPA ARTISTS AND THEIR MUSIC IN LATE MING CHINA
Abstract During the Ming dynasty, within a span of almost three centuries China's political organization, social structure, and important cultural elements were transformed by changes in government, military reforms, urban life, interaction with foreign peoples (in particular the naval expeditions of Zheng He <inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="splitsection3_in1.tif"/> [1371–1433]), advancement in science and technology, and the growth of literature and art. Thanks to the increase of commercial printing during the period, a vast amount of primary sources has been preserved, providing modern-day scholars with the necessary information to understand the diversity and complexity of the Ming era. However, although sinologists and historians have produced a tremendous amount on various Ming topics, much work is needed concerning music. One can certainly argue for the attention that has been given to tuning systems, qin <inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="splitsection3_in2.tif"/> music, ritual music, and dramatic arts, but they constitute only a fraction of the multiplicity of genres and the wide range of expression in Ming music. Without scrutiny into the other genres and expressions, we will never be able to enlarge our picture of Ming music and musical life, and their relationship to the larger social and cultural milieus.
Introduction to the Special Issue
When Ted Farmer wrote his “News of the Field” piece for the first volume of Ming Studies in 1975, he described his vision for the journal as “an informal vehicle which will serve the needs of all who are interested in the Ming period”, adding that “In scope it will include such fields as history, the fine arts, philosophy and literature.” In Farmer’s recollection of that time, these were “the only four fields in which I could identify anyone writing in English.” Much has changed in the more than four decades that have passed since that first issue; this short introductory piece is not the place to present a comprehensive overview of the developments within the field of Ming Studies as a whole. It may be worthwhile, however, to reflect briefly on what “Ming Studies” has meant for much of that time, especially in terms of chronology, space and discipline. Of course, in a publishing environment where there are journals entitled T’ang Studies, Journal of Song Yuan Studies, and Late Imperial China, it might seem unproblematic that Ming Studies should cover the chronological period from 1368 to 1644. Looking through the titles of Ming Studies articles over the years, article authors do mostly that; there are relatively few articles that focus, for example, on the Yuan dynasty. There are reviews of books that deal with the Yuan, often written by Ming specialists such as John Dardess, as there are reviews of the books that John Dardess wrote about the Yuan dynasty, but no research articles that have “Yuan Dynasty” in their title. Chronologically speaking, then, for most of this journal’s past, the field of Ming Studies covered the study of the period between 1368 and 1644. The topics explored in the journal, whether these were of a literary, religious, philosophical or more broadly historical nature, were all drawn from within these chronological limits. In terms of space, too, the articles included in Ming Studies have remained within the clear boundaries of the Ming Empire: south of the Great Wall and the northern garrisons, east of Tibet and Assam, and on the land side of the maritime frontier. Of course, there are exceptions: familiar characters like Zheng He, seafarers and pirates make regular appearances in the pages of Ming Studies too. There are also articles on the world beyond Ming-controlled territory, such as studies of the SichuanTibetan frontier, or discussions of Ming foreign relations, such as those dealing with Ming–Mongol interactions. But on the whole, the articles in Ming Studies deal with the Han-Chinese world located within the borders such as they were established and maintained by the Ming Empire. The study of Ming China, the underlying assumption appears to be, had clear limits in terms of time and space for most of its publication history. In disciplinary terms, too, the articles in Ming Studies remained largely within certain precincts. Ted Farmer’s suggested fields: history, the fine arts, philosophy and literature, were for many years the central pillars of sinology, and they Ming Studies, 78, 2–6, October 2018
In 1926: Living at the Edge of Time
User's manual: airplanes Americans in Paris asssembly lines automobiles bars boxing bullfighting cremation dancing elevators employees endurance engineers gomina gramophones hunger artists jazz league of nations mountaineering movie palaces mummies murder ocean liners polarities railroads reporters revues roof gardens six-day races stars strikes telephones timepieces wireless communication. Codes: action versus impotence authenticity versus artificiality centre versus periphery immanence versus transcendence individuality versus collectivity male versus female present versus past silence versus noise sobriety versus exuberance uncertainty versus reality action = impotence (tragedy) authenticity = artificiality (life) centre = periphery (infinitude) immanence = transendence (death) indiciduality = collectivity (leader) male = female (gender trouble) present = past (eternity). frames: after learning from history being-in the-worlds of 1926 - Martin Heidegger, Hans Friedrich Blunck, Carl Van Vechten.