Dialogue between ancient and modern: I create programs, national treasures have spirits

Chapter 228 His Controversy Is Too Much
The format of the program is not complicated, it can even be said to be very simple.

But every question focuses on the host’s historical skills.

The time to get the program is actually not long, and the time for planning and designing the topic in advance is also very limited.

Therefore, in the process of searching for information, there must be an extremely clear purpose.

Searching here and there, it is impossible to get the correct answer in such a short period of time.

Just like the first question, the comparison of the force value of Confucius and Li Bai.

In fact, the general public's point of view has always been very simple.

These two people are both literati, and combined with the common images in film and television dramas, there is no doubt that they are frail scholars.

In fact, history is often subversive to a certain extent. The subversion lies in the fact that many historical figures in the eyes of the general public come from various legends, movies, TV dramas and novels. As for this figure in history, who is What it looks like is a very vague concept in the public mind.

How many years has the image of Confucius been away from us?

It has been more than 500 years since the birth of Confucius.

No one knows how much the image of Confucius will change in such a long time.

History is interesting because no one can go back to the era that existed in history.

Through historical materials and archaeological discoveries, we can get a glimpse of the glory and magnificence of the past.

But after all, this is just a glimpse, and it can only pick up a few insignificant shells in the historical tide, while large sections of historical truth are lost in the long river of time with the passage of time.

What Yi Ze can do is to try his best to restore a real history, and to uncover all kinds of false labels attached to historical figures.

Was Confucius a weak scholar?

From a popular point of view, Confucius is.

The reason for this view is the deep-rooted public perception of the inherent image of scholars for thousands of years.

People in the world often say that the hand has no power to restrain a chicken, and it is described as a scholar.

In various novels, films, and TV dramas, the image of scholars is that of being weak in literature and being talkative, but also benevolent, righteous, and moral.

In this way, the image of Confucius, the ancestor of scholars, will naturally change.

Weak, powerless, benevolent and moral...

In addition, the ideological concepts that have been widely publicized for a long time, such as repaying grievances with virtue, benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and trust, etc., the spread of these ideas will undoubtedly have a subtle influence on the public.

Our ancestors told us to repay our grievances with kindness, so we must be tolerant. When others give you a knife, you should return it with a smile and be magnanimous...

To be honest, cheap or not.

It is precisely because of this out-of-context understanding that Confucius, who was originally flesh and blood and had a strong personality, became a model for all generations sitting on the altar, full of moral glory.

Of course, this is also the favorite image of the ruler. After all, if it is set like this, the people can manage it better, and they will not make mistakes every day.

As for the real Confucius, who cares?

It's just a person who has rotted in the coffin. No matter how you explain it, this person will never appear in front of you.

Labels, no matter how many titles there are, such as Master of All Ages, Saint of Heaven, Supreme Master of the Most Holy...such lofty and coquettish titles, one by one, anyway, Confucius is gone, how much does the hat want to give him? , how many can there be.

The people are easy to control and the country is easy to manage, that's enough.

Ordinary people just watch it for fun, and don't care who it is.

As long as the propaganda is in place and positive information is everywhere, even the cunning villains who do all kinds of evil can have an excellent reputation. Can be a traitor.

After all, ordinary people only care about whether the topic is high enough, whether there is a strong contrast, and whether this person is controversial.

This has been the case since ancient times.

The image of a person has never been fixed.

With the passage of time, as word of mouth deteriorates, a person's image will also change dramatically.

Just like the last emperor of the Tartars, he was clearly a traitor and an incompetent man, but he could still be whitewashed into a poor man and a noble son.

It's like Ji Xiaolan, after hundreds of years, who knows how many labels he has?
Even if Ji Xiaolan lives again, she may not be able to achieve such a dramatic effect.

But, in the eyes of the public, Ji Xiaolan is such a dramatic character.

Can it be reversed?

can!
But it is difficult.

When a deep-rooted image enters everyone's heart, if you want to reverse this image, you must break it from the beginning and then rebuild it. Finally, under the reincarnation of several generations, a new image can be re-established.

This is still in an ideal state. In fact, due to the interference of various factors, the mixing of various theories, and the change of an inherent image, it will take hundreds of years or thousands of years.

For example, nowadays, Confucius's saying "repay evil with kindness" is widely circulated, but how many people know the context?
There will only be a sentence "repay grievances with virtue" in textbooks, but will "repay grievances with straightness"?

No, because some people don't allow it.

Therefore, the most hooligan thing in the world is "excerpts from this article".

If you can't see the whole picture of the excerpted things, you can't know what the original author wants to express.

And ancient things have profound meanings, and different interpretations will bring different answers.

Just like Mencius's "There are three kinds of unfilial piety, the greatest is to have no descendants". Doesn't it mean that there are no descendants when you just saw it?
It means to have more children, this is the only way to be filial.

But the semantics of Chinese is extremely broad.

Does "later" necessarily mean future generations?

In ancient times, especially before the advent of paper on a large scale, writing instruments were always quite bulky.

Although bamboo slips and the like can be used, but if you write a thousand characters, the weight will not be low.

How is it like now, an online novel with tens of millions of words is only a dozen MB, and the weight can be roughly ignored.

But it was different in ancient times. If someone really wrote a book with tens of millions of words, it would not be described as rich in learning, but in five tons of learning.

Therefore, the limitation of writing materials makes books deviate from spoken language, which is a very normal phenomenon.

Mencius said every day, "There are three ways to be unfilial, and having no descendants is the greatest"?

That's not necessarily the case, maybe the mantra at that time was almost the same as it is now, for example, damn it, huh...

Therefore, what is written in the book is definitely a highly simplified thing.

There won't be any wordiness, every word is precious.

Otherwise, if Sima Qian wrote "Historical Records" instead of the modern method, typing on the keyboard and using the computer to record the history of thousands of years from the Yellow Emperor to the Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, wouldn't he have to write hundreds of millions of words?

And how many characters are there in "Historical Records"?
There are only 52.

Now, this word count is only two months after the novel was released.

Of course, the conditions in ancient times were different from those of today, so we cannot make such a simple comparison.

However, if there was a convenient recording method and a material basis for long-winded essays, would ancient Chinese be so obscure?

Certainly not.

Once an article is written, it is meant for others to read. To spread one's ideas and opinions and convey one's spiritual world, it must be understood by everyone.

Write an article, if everyone can't understand it, or if everyone's understanding is very different, it will spread a fart idea.

There is a saying that goes well: for a thousand readers, there are a thousand Hamlets.

But no matter how the readers change, what they see is always Hamlet.

Instead of this person looking at, eh, Hamlet, that person looks at, wow, Harry Potter.

Confucianism, Mohism, Dao, Yin and Yang, everyone has different thoughts and theories, and if you want to spread your thoughts, you have to go around and write books to pass on your thoughts to future generations.

Therefore, accurate meaning is a basic requirement.

Otherwise, if you read "The Analects of Confucius", you will realize the tranquility and inaction, what is this called?
Therefore, what does Mencius mean by this sentence, and how much profound meaning does this "post" contain, people can only get the answer through conjecture and argumentation.

But even so, because of the changes between simplified and traditional Chinese, and because of the changes in the meaning of words over thousands of years, what the original text means is enough to debate for a lifetime.

Does it simply refer to "future generations", or does it refer to "failure to fulfill the responsibilities that future generations should fulfill"?
If the meaning is different, the meaning of the whole sentence will be completely different.

If Mencius had a computer and a keyboard, would he still need to search so hard?
When writing a book, you have to pay attention to the number of words, not too many.

If there are too many words, there will be more bamboo slips, which will be difficult for others to see.

It is not convenient to carry it, and it also greatly increases the risk of being lost.

Therefore, if you want to spread your thoughts more widely, these works that carry your own thoughts should not be too lengthy, but must be extremely streamlined.

Some people say that all the things mentioned above should be omitted, and the meaning that can be expressed in one or two words should not be used in one sentence.

In doing so, the length of the work will be greatly reduced and the meaning will become more elusive.

But fortunately, it is easier to spread your books. If others recommend them to their friends, they only need to take one or even half a volume of bamboo slips.

Otherwise, when someone likes your theory and wants to recommend it to others, you have to hire several ox carts to pull the bamboo slips, which is very troublesome.

Most people don't like trouble, and it's best if they can solve it directly.

As for what kind of different thoughts people will have after reading his works, Mencius can't decide, as long as the general direction is correct, that's fine.

As for personal understanding, it doesn't matter anymore. If the core remains the same, the principles will remain the same, and the rest of the side details can be ignored.

It's like someone realized from the four words "no descendants are great" that people cannot live without descendants. Is this wrong?
No, on the contrary, it fits the background of the times at that time, people should have more children.

And I understand that people must fulfill their responsibilities as children and grandchildren. Is that wrong?

There is nothing wrong with that, this is part of the "filial piety" emphasized by Confucianism.

As for other meanings, that's okay.

Nothing changes without departing from its original origin. Is the key point in this sentence the latter part?

No, the main thing is the word "filial piety" at the front.

As for the latter, no matter how you understand it, most people will not deviate too much.

Really want to understand what happened behind, later, the meaning of the future.

This shows that people who read books are not Mencius’s audience at all.

No matter how you understand it, there is no hindrance.

Of course, this is the fun of ancient prose. Different people can often see different meanings.

For example, how rich is the meaning of "knowledge" in "I don't know but not stunned, isn't it a gentleman?" in ancient times?
Do you know, understand, or pass through "wisdom"?
Therefore, future generations will always look at the predecessors with a pair of colored glasses.

Absolute justice does not exist.

The ideology and culture left by the predecessors will only be selectively absorbed by future generations.

The part that is often absorbed is the part that you need.

How distorted is the image and doctrine of Confucius?

How seriously have Ji Xiaolan's image and contributions been distorted?
The past is so vivid that it is really shocking.

And the next topic that appeared on the big screen, the protagonist involved is even more talked about.

His story, his experience, his thoughts and even his contribution, how outrageous the spread on the Internet, the audience at the scene knew it well.

As for titles, there are even more.

There are good things, there are bad things, and there are things that are neither bad nor bad.

What kind of person is he?

Who knows?

It's just the words in the history books, most of which say that he was a tyrant.

But what is the truth of history?

Is there any unknown ideological struggle behind the person who wrote the history book?

Or in different eras, because of the oppression of the current boss, the historians also had to take it seriously and deliberately describe certain historical facts while avoiding the important ones?

These are all uncertain things.

A description that avoids the important and ignores the trivial can often change the true nature of a thing.

For example, if two people fight and their noses and faces are swollen, and they go to mediate and ask for the reason, then it must be that the public is justified and the mother-in-law is justified.

But the truth of the matter still requires various types of evidence collection or monitoring.

Now all kinds of monitoring are flying all over the sky, so it is not too difficult to find the truth of the matter.

But in ancient times, let alone surveillance, there may not be many witnesses.

And the human eye is the most false monitoring in the world, who knows how many changes will occur after the information it receives is processed by the brain?

For example, some people only see a man beating his wife in public and think it is domestic violence and the man's fault.

But who knows, whose fault is behind this?
Either catching rape in bed, or hysteria before despair.

The eyes can deceive people, and the brain can also deceive people. Even the mobile phone camera has its own beauty and has learned to deceive people.

Therefore, when the topic appeared on the big screen, the audience began to chatter.

On the bullet screen, it was full.

Because this person, his controversy, is really too great.

……

(End of this chapter)