英文摘要
|
It's the constant values inside the Classics that make them last forever while myriad things changed.
The criticisms in the Classics or histories are written to distinguish right and wrong therefore to defend the values that are worth holding. Actually it has no alternatives but to manage the causes and effects or to find why principals get in a dilemma before criticized them. It will be biased if criticisms are restricted to a narrow confine. On the other hand, it's never easy to make criticisms even if we could grasp the whole amount.
There are two objects in this essay. First, what exactly loyalty means in ”Zuo Zhuan” in such a ethics crunch time. Next, how does ”Zuo Zhuan” deal with loyalty which has been blurred with fatuous princes and treacherous ministers. This essay examines arguments about loyalty in ”Zuo Zhuan” then find out it's not princes or masters but the country which ministers should be faithful to, that's what called loyalty in ”Zuo Zhuan”. Also this essay inspects narratives about ”Yan Ying didn't die for his prince” to see how critic isms are made in ”Zuo Zhuan”.
As mentioned to how criticisms are made, except ”gentlemen said” as usual, there are still other ways. Narrative patterns in ”Zuo Zhuan” and lens in a movie are somewhat alike. Audiences or readers will have wider view and get more information while lens zoom out, on the other hand, they can examine events minutely therefore some concealed truth will be unveiled while lens zoom in. In other words, ”Zuo Zhuan” tries to show the most processes of events to let readers get more viewpoints and thus construct criticisms by themselves. In this adroit skill in narrative, ”Zuo Zhuan” affects readers' judgements and defines values clearly and delicately.
|