Chapter 20 Comment on Hu Shizhi's "A Minimum Bibliography of Chinese Studies"

I don't agree with Hu Jun's bibliography, because his text is not on the topic.Hu Jun said: "It is not conceived for those who have a solid foundation in Chinese studies, but only for ordinary young people who want to acquire some systematic knowledge of Chinese studies." There is absolutely no system", or some of them apply.I think that the gentlemen of "Tsinghua Weekly" are not here to ask Mr. Hu for advice, but for those young people who "have never read a single Chinese book except the textbooks of the Commercial Press".If my guess is correct, then Hu Jun's answer is too far apart.

The reason why Mr. Hu made a mistake is firstly that he does not rely on objective facts, but only relies on his own subjective standpoint.Hu Jun is working on "History of Chinese Philosophy" and "History of Chinese Literature". This bibliography is exactly the path of his own thinking and the materials he relies on. (Whether they are right or not is another question. Let’s not discuss it now.) As everyone knows, not everyone wants to be a historian of philosophy or literature; read.If I really want to be a historian of philosophy and literature, these books are not enough.

Hu Jun's second mistake is that he confuses the books that should be read with the books that should be prepared.The result is not the minimum for personal reading, but the minimum for small libraries of private and public institutions. (But it’s not true. It can only be said that it is the minimum of a small private library for historians of philosophy and literature.) As everyone knows, young students (especially Tsinghua University) are struggling to run into the library and don’t know what books to read and how to read them. What is the use of giving him a library catalog?What's more, buying books privately is easier said than done?How can everyone buy this bibliography?Isn't the result empty talk?

What surprised me the most was why Mr. Hu rejected all history books.A bibliography is called "Minimum Chinese Studies", and there is "Nine Lives and Strange Injustices" in it, but there are no "Historical Records" and "Hanshu", isn't it a joke?It would be unreasonable to say that "History", "Han" and "Tongjian" are only listed "for those who have a solid foundation in Chinese studies".If you don't read "Nine Lives and Strange Injustice", you will not be able to meet the minimum requirements of Chinese studies. To tell you the truth, Hu Jun, a mere kid is someone who has never read these two books.Although I know that my knowledge is poor and I say that I don't even have the minimum knowledge of Chinese culture, I still refuse to accept it.

In all fairness, those who are engaged in the history of literature (especially the history of vernacular literature) should read these books; but how can Hu Jun force ordinary young people to follow you because he loves to do literature history.For example, someone who likes epigraphy can make a systematic research bibliography of epigraphy books; someone who likes geography can make a systematic research bibliography of geography books.Although it is just for the practitioners, it cannot be applied in general.In my opinion, most of the books listed by Hu Jun are comparable to "Jin Shi Cui Bian", "Ming Zhai Ji Gu Lu", "Yin Ruins Book Deed Research and Interpretation" (Jin Shi Lei Shu), "Shui Dao Outline", "Shuofang Bei Cheng", "Yuan History Translation Zheng Supplement" " (geography books) and so on have the same nature, although they are not books that should not be read, they are certainly not books that everyone should read.Hu Junfu wrote in "Tsinghua Weekly": "I mean, I want a group of foreign students to know that "Yuan Qu Xuan" and other books should be known." ""Shuofang Beicheng"... are books that should be known. Then, it is convenient to transfer a "Siku Quanshu General Catalog" to the paper, and then list and publish thousands of books. Why open the minimum bibliography?It should be noted that "knowing" is one thing, but "must read" is another.

My claim is pretty bland.I believe that the history books are the most important part of Chinese studies. In addition to the pre-Qin classics and sub-books, the most important thing is to read the official history, "Tongjian", Song Yuanming "Jishi Benmo" and one part of Jiutong, and the relationship The anthology of notes and essays on history can be regarded as the common sense of Chinese studies, and all Chinese scholars must read it.People with this kind of common sense are not self-satisfied. When you want to become a professional scholar, if you want to be a historian of philosophy or literature, you can consult Hu Jun’s bibliography; Door, I can reluctantly follow Hu Jun's example and open another bibliography for you.

Hu Jun has done a lot of research on the two subjects he likes, and he has a strong ability to make choices. He thinks that ordinary young people should do the same, and there is no need to make different choices, so he listed many bibliographies.Just think about the more than one hundred volumes of "The Complete Book of Zhengyitang", with the same "regulation of qi and life", how can young people start to read it?More than "Zhengyi Tang", that is, based on the "Twenty-two Sons" engraved in Zhejiang, it tells the young man that this book should be read, so where should he start?As for the literature listed in the Department of His Literary History, "Ancient Three Dynasties, Qin, Han, Three Kingdoms and Six Dynasties", "Full Han, Three Kingdoms, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties Poems", "Ancient Wenyuan", "Continued Ancient Wenyuan", "Tang Wencui", "Quan Tang Poems", "Song Wenjian", "Southern Song Wenfan", " Southern Song Wenlu, Song Shichao, Song Liushijia Ci, Siyinzhai Song and Yuan Ci, Qiangcun's Inscribed Ci, Selected Hundreds of Yuan Operas, Jin Wenzui, Yuan Wen Lei, Ming Wen I roughly estimate that there are more than a thousand volumes of books such as "Poetry Collection of Lie Dynasty", "Comprehensive Poetry of Ming Dynasty", "Sixty Kinds of Songs", where do people start to read?Young students, because we are "old horses who know the way", when we ask for advice humbly, we should at least tell him a sequence: for example, you should read a certain book first and then read another book in Tang poetry. You should read a certain book first, and then a certain book. You cannot say that you should read all the works written by Wang Youxia and Zhu Guwei.It is true that you will make a different choice after reading all of them. I am afraid that he will simply not read them.What's more, if young people have so much energy and daily energy to read more than a thousand volumes of literary books designated by Hu Jun, how can they use it to read Twenty-Four Histories and Nine Tongs?

There is another layer, Hu Jun forgets that when students do not have the most common knowledge of Chinese studies, there are many books that cannot be read.Let me ask people who haven't even read "Historical Records", read Cui Shi's "Historical Records Exploring the Origin", understand what he said?People who have not even read "Shangshu", "Historical Records", "Book of Rites" and "Guoyu" read Cui Shu's "Kaoxinlu" and understand what he said?People who have not even read "Historical Records·Rulin Biography" and "Hanshu·Yiwenzhi" read Kang Youwei's "Xinxue Apocrypha" and understand what he said?This is just a few examples, others can be analogized.If there is a student (assuming he is still a student who specializes in the history of thought), he respectfully follows Hu Jun’s teaching and reads along the bibliography listed by him. His books obviously do not include such books as "Shangshu", "Historical Records" and "Hanshu" , Do you think this student, when he read the works of Cui Shu, Kang Youwei, and Cui Shi, how embarrassed should he be?

Hu Jun's meaning, or the premise that this student has already read "Shangshu", "Historical Records" and "Hanshu", thinking that of course you have read such ordinary books, why should I say?Then, "Four Books" is more common, so why is it included?All in all, "Shangshu", "Historical Records" and "Hanshu" are the minimum unnecessary books for Chinese studies, while "Zhengyitang Quanshu" and "Zi Baiqiu" are necessary books. (There is no such thing as the Ministry of Thought. For whatever reason, I also ask Hu Jun to answer.)

All in all, Hu Jun’s bibliography, from one point of view, thinks he has too many leaks;