Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chicory's avatar

Hello Mr. Daniel! I am just writing this comment to say that I am incredibly grateful and excited to come across your blog and project. I only recently got into Dream of the Red Chamber, haven’t got my hands on a copy of either translated versions mentioned here since I only read up summaries, papers, and watched a documentary alongside an adaptation to enrich my knowledge of the overall plot (due to a game that piqued my interest towards the book). Instead, it caught my interests! Your passionate and educated commentary is really insightful, and your analysis really shines. So I will definitely try to follow along your project! I am Gen Z and not the most literate but I want to practice reading as I can now—while connecting with my Chinese side of family’s cultures, so I really appreciate this blog and what you do. Apologies for any mistakes I made in this comment. I am simply very grateful and refreshed to access the insights shared.

I wish you nothing but wellness. Thank you!

Expand full comment
Daniel Tome's avatar

Hi Daniel. Congratulations for this blog. It is great you are translating the Dream, and sharing your analytical research and artistic insights with the world.

I think David Hawkes deemed the introductory paragraph you discuss in this post as written by a commentator, not by Cao Xueqin himself. Hawkes identified the commentator as Xueqin's younger brother. Although in it the commentator quotes Xueqin, it remains commentary. If I recall correctly, the Yangs later agreed with Hawkes' assessment on this point.

Knowing that Hawkins was not following any one edition of the Chinese text, his omitting the commentary and relegating it to his own introduction is acceptable in my view -- akin to the poet John Dryden's rejection of the supposed opening lines of the Aeneid in his translation of that Roman epic poem; Dryden also translated them only in his preface to the translation.

I have a question for you concerning the opening paragraph. Do you think Xueqin saying in that introductory comment that he regrets not having listened to and followed the advice from his father, viz. that he should study to have a worldly career, goes against the character of Baoyu (a free spirit struggling to remain pure in this world of red dust) and thus arguably clashes with the whole book's true message? I have been told the Chinese may be more comfortable with contradictions than Westerners such as myself are, but this still perplexes me. If I had to venture a guess, I would say that comment was written in part to fool the censors.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts