With all due respect to Ursula Le Guin, interpretations of an ancient text which take liberties with that text only serve to take us further from what possible meanings there might have been in the original, and it becomes something completely different. Layers upon layers of historical and cultural misinterpretations, beginning with the Jesuits, who attemped to Christianize the DDJ preceded LeGuin. As for "dao-ing" , there are some scholarly points of view about translating classical Chinese with verbs, nouns etc. Ames and Hall attempt to 'solve' this issue by using "way-making' : which personally I find clumsy and awkward.
As for her "unwanting soul" and "ever-wanting soul" : again, an unnecessary addition of an english word 'soul' -- which has all kinds of cultural ramifications and meanings -- which is not there in the original. ( I believe this is her version of wuyu η‘欲) It is not so simple to find a similar word (and meaning) for "soul" in Chinese: at the very basic, there are considered two souls, the hun and the po -- yang and yin, spiritual and corporeal; and then they get subdivided into three huns and seven pos... etc etc etc.
I realise that Le Guin meant "soul" in the sense that we would colloquially refer to a person, as in "she's an old soul", however in translating or 'interpreting' an ancient religious or spiritual text to use words like soul indicates concepts that are not there in the original and in my opinion only cause to obfuscate rather than enlighten.
Nevertheless, your meditations on how this text has meaning in your life are always relevant to people, Paul. Love the sunrise in Shenzhen picture!!
I always find much to learn from your thoughts and experience, Debbie, I do look forward to your feedback. ππ» Language is such a poor medium for communication, but itβs what we got. Sure she meant well and went out of her way to not make any claim to scholarship or special understanding. I understand she worked this project on and off for thirty years; very personal to her. She knew she was moulding the text. I think itβs accessibility recommends it. One value of all these viewpoints and attempts to me is the windows opened on the influence of cultures on thought, which you are able to spot so well.
We all learn from each other, Paul. π I guess maybe I shouldn't be so harsh. You are right, she didn't claim it to be a 'translation' , more a 'rendition', and it's other people who put those words into her mouth. The problem becomes when other people read it, and take some of the terms she uses (like 'unwanting soul' at face value and misinterpret the text. But i guess that is part of what keeps it alive as people keep talking about it!!
I think weβre noticing another of those cycles that are so important βΊοΈ More people turning thoughtfulness inward is a great gift of this text and tradition.
With all due respect to Ursula Le Guin, interpretations of an ancient text which take liberties with that text only serve to take us further from what possible meanings there might have been in the original, and it becomes something completely different. Layers upon layers of historical and cultural misinterpretations, beginning with the Jesuits, who attemped to Christianize the DDJ preceded LeGuin. As for "dao-ing" , there are some scholarly points of view about translating classical Chinese with verbs, nouns etc. Ames and Hall attempt to 'solve' this issue by using "way-making' : which personally I find clumsy and awkward.
As for her "unwanting soul" and "ever-wanting soul" : again, an unnecessary addition of an english word 'soul' -- which has all kinds of cultural ramifications and meanings -- which is not there in the original. ( I believe this is her version of wuyu η‘欲) It is not so simple to find a similar word (and meaning) for "soul" in Chinese: at the very basic, there are considered two souls, the hun and the po -- yang and yin, spiritual and corporeal; and then they get subdivided into three huns and seven pos... etc etc etc.
I realise that Le Guin meant "soul" in the sense that we would colloquially refer to a person, as in "she's an old soul", however in translating or 'interpreting' an ancient religious or spiritual text to use words like soul indicates concepts that are not there in the original and in my opinion only cause to obfuscate rather than enlighten.
Nevertheless, your meditations on how this text has meaning in your life are always relevant to people, Paul. Love the sunrise in Shenzhen picture!!
I always find much to learn from your thoughts and experience, Debbie, I do look forward to your feedback. ππ» Language is such a poor medium for communication, but itβs what we got. Sure she meant well and went out of her way to not make any claim to scholarship or special understanding. I understand she worked this project on and off for thirty years; very personal to her. She knew she was moulding the text. I think itβs accessibility recommends it. One value of all these viewpoints and attempts to me is the windows opened on the influence of cultures on thought, which you are able to spot so well.
We all learn from each other, Paul. π I guess maybe I shouldn't be so harsh. You are right, she didn't claim it to be a 'translation' , more a 'rendition', and it's other people who put those words into her mouth. The problem becomes when other people read it, and take some of the terms she uses (like 'unwanting soul' at face value and misinterpret the text. But i guess that is part of what keeps it alive as people keep talking about it!!
I think weβre noticing another of those cycles that are so important βΊοΈ More people turning thoughtfulness inward is a great gift of this text and tradition.
Happy Chinese New Year!