the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
First time I read it was in the English translation of Romance of the Three Kingdoms I think. I definitely remember reading about it on Wikipedia but I think that was spurred by trying to understand what the heck was going on in Three Kingdoms.
I love RotTK but god damn does it require a lot of reading on historical & cultural context.
-
unrelated comments about three kingdoms
it’s really a great read if you can push through the density and the historical/cultural barrier. The entire novel is a fascinating argument against great man theory by the end; all the legendary heroic figures are dead and gone and life continued. I used to hate the ending as a kid (who got into it because of Dynasty Warriors of course) but it is really poignant looking back.Worth it entirely for understanding Mandate of Heaven jokes of course.
Is this deliberate, do you think?
I want to say yes to a degree - “great man theory” hadn’t been codified by the time RotTK was written of course but despite the larger than life figures present in the novel I think it refutes the assumptions that lead to the theory.
We have these legendary figures who are sure their actions are backed by inevitable destiny, or are absolute paragons of heroism etc. Guan Yu, Zhuge Liang, Liu Bei, Cao Cao etc. and each eventually pass into history as the wars continue to their end. Some are lauded for their virtues and their deaths are lamented but it’s never said that this was truly the end of some great era of heroes or some such. The ambitions of humans and the rise and fall of nations continues. It’s there from the beginning, the novel is prefaced with the poem:
On and on the Great River rolls, racing east,
Of proud and gallant heroes its white-tops leave no trace,
As right and wrong, pride and fall turn all at once unreal.
Yet ever the green hills stay
To blaze in the west-waning day.
Fishers and woodmen comb the river isles.
White-crowned, they've seen enough of spring and autumn tide
To make good company over the wine jar,
Where many a famed event
Provides their merriment.
As I said it used to make me sad to see all these great larger than life heroes die or stray from heroism, what have you, but it rings more true this way I think. Human lives are ephemeral and time again the “greatest” lives are proven to just be human like any other, fallible and fleeting. Life continues.
I see what you mean and agree about tbe apparent bent of the poem. Incidentally, it is quite a nice poem and reminds me of another old Chinese poem where someone talks about how they and their life changed over the decades but the rain remains the same (staged much more artfully than that, of course).