Literary Empress Dowager Cixi by Jung Chang

[Bookpossum]

Thanks again Steve. That did seem a more measured and definitely more positive review.

I think those incidents you mention are not so convincing because Chang brushes through them quickly and without detail, presumably because they are black marks against Cixi. On the other hand, she does at least mention them, where someone trying to do a complete whitewash would omit them or somehow blame someone else for those actions.

[Bookworm_Girl]

I finally had a block of time to read today and am catching up. I just finished reading about "Wild Fox Kang," the 100 days of reform, and subsequent imprisonment of the Quangxu Emperor. Fascinating!

Wikipedia says:

Kang's reputation serves as an important barometer for the political attitudes of his time. In the span of less than twenty years, he went from being regarded as an iconoclastic radical to an anachronistic pariah. In Jung Chang's biography of the Empress Dowager, he is depicted as a self-serving zealot who was always seeking personal power above national considerations.

[issybird]

This book was very much a mixed bag for me. It was an engaging and entertaining read, it covered a broad sweep of Chinese history about which I knew nothing, and the details of court life in imperial China were riveting. I’m also amenable to the notion that powerful women suffer in the accounts of contemporary chroniclers and historians and also that in this particular case, an anti-Manchu backlash contributed to the anathematization of Cixi.

That said, Chang still lost me. Part of this was her fangirlish style. It didn’t read like serious history, but more like a high school theme with all the passion and blindness to alternative theories that implies. Ultimately, it was just silly. In overselling her case, she undermined it. Given the popular impression of Cixi endorsed by many historians, she needed to examine the evidence against her case. Instead, she was fond of sweeping judgments such as, “This was wrong.” Evidence, please? Making a character like Kang both the villain and responsible for much of the popular perception of Cixi only made him a proto-Cixi. Nuance is a concept seemingly foreign to Chang.

Worse, and this was a point made in the review linked to by bfisher which I didn’t read until after I had made up my own mind, is that Chang’s assigning all the responsibility for sweeping changes in China, industrial and economic and social, to Cixi’s farsightedness and abilities is flatly ridiculous. Again, I know nothing about Chinese history, but I know enough about economic development to know it just doesn’t happen that way, and especially in a country as large and populous as China. This read like the Book of Genesis, Cixi issuing various dicta from on high and they just happened. She was clearly an adept at palace intrigue, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to managing the intricate webs of national commerce and development. Knowing nothing about the specifics of Chinese development, I still don’t buy it. If it were so, Chang needed to provide supporting material and perhaps spend a little less time on fingernails and jewels, although then the book wouldn’t have been as juicy.

Some of the book was unintentionally amusing, as Chang tried to avoid her own entanglements. I loved how it was ok because Cixi didn’t steal a lot of money from the Navy, only a little. And there was no way, given her biases, that Chang could make sense of Cixi’s agency in the Boxer Rebellion.

All of this is not to say I didn’t enjoy the book or think it worth reading, it just caused frequent huge eye-rolls.

As an aside, because I didn’t want to fall too far behind, I ended up listening to the audiobook and the narration by Jolene Kim was dreadful. Mispronunciations, errors that she corrected rather than rerecording the muffed bit, and worst of all, pacing that made frequent pauses where there was no punctuation. Unfortunately it’s the only version I see available from Audible and OverDrive in the US; obviously sun surfer had a better experience.

Finally, I’d like to bring up an issue for possible discussion. I imply no criticism of the book as a choice; I can’t, since not only had I already bought it, I voted for it. But my judgment after reading it is that the book doesn’t qualify as literary biography. It clearly falls into the “popular” category for me.

Litfic is relatively easy to judge (although reasonable people may disagree, obviously); I just apply the Justice Potter Stewart litmus test. (For non-Americans, that’s “I know it when I see it.”) But for nonfiction, while seemingly less literary on the face of it, I think it’s easier to define qualifications. For me, non-fiction can be deemed literary because of writing style, the scholarship, ground-breaking theory or methodology. Obviously Chang’s intent was to be ground-breaking, but I think she needed to support her interpretation better than she did. My overall impression was that the book was an interesting and fun read and that I learned a fair amount from it, but that the treatment ultimately was cheesy and it didn’t make the cut as a literary work, for me.

[desertblues]

Originally Posted by issybird

This book was very much a mixed bag for me...

It didn’t read like serious history, but more like a high school theme with all the passion and blindness to alternative theories that implies...

I’d like to bring up an issue for possible discussion...
the book doesn’t qualify as literary biography. It clearly falls into the “popular” category for me....

My overall impression was that the book was an interesting and fun read and that I learned a fair amount from it, but that the treatment ultimately was cheesy and it didn’t make the cut as a literary work, for me.

I do like your post about this book, Issybird! You bring some very valid things on the table. Some thoughts about this.

I can see your point about the Empress Cixi being a literary book or not. But on the other hand, I think most non fiction books, well researched or documented are not literature. Sometimes such a book turns in a dry list of facts and where is the literary aspect, the beautiful language or the less beautiful language that stimulates reflection and so on? I found this for example in The Conquest of the Incas (John Hemming), which may be a good book(literary?…) but it didn’t make me think or reflect in any way, except horror for the Spaniards and some surprise at the naivety of the Incas.

I found the Empress Cixi an exciting read and am still reading up about the the context. For me, Chang made a very readable book out of it, but I don’t see it per se as ‘The historical book' ‚ or 'The truth’ about the China of that period. I would find it difficult to judge such a book on a professional level and also for this Book Club, as this is too far away from the Literary Book club we’re reading for. In that sense I do agree with Issybird, but perhaps for other reasons.

And what is the truth about history? It always is an interpretation after the facts and the big question is by whom. China’s history in any given period is very complex. I always like to critically read several books, historical or otherwise about/around a country/subject and make up my mind afterwards.

[Bookpossum]

Yes, I do see the problem that this book was written in too popular and "easy-to-read" a style to be classified as literature, and is also not rigorous enough to be classed as history.

I suppose part of the problem is that until we read it, we don't know that. So given that this book received largely positive reviews and I seem to remember was short-listed for a prize (not necessarily proof positive I know!), how are we to judge whether the book should be chosen or not?

It's a tricky problem and I'm not sure we can find the solution to it, short of not having non-fiction works unless they are by a recognised writer of literature. For example, Robert Graves' Goodbye to All That I think would qualify. On the other hand, such a writer might be much better at fiction than non-fiction!

Thanks for keeping us on our toes, issybird and desertblues.

[Bookworm_Girl]

We seem to really struggle with defining non-fiction literature, and we've had similar debates in the past. I'm not sure which side I fall on after finishing this book. In this case, I think it may be a case of not living up to expectations which we can't know until we read it. Would we be having this same discussion if we had read her other books Wild Swans or Mao co-written with her historian husband? Perhaps or perhaps not.

I would hate to set our criteria so rigid that it limits the diversity of our choices or prevents us from taking risks on our choices. I thought the book had the appearance of meeting literature when I nominated it: an award-winning author, an author whose books are seen as influential and therefore banned in her home country, a potentially ground-breaking record of an historical figure based on previously unused/uninterpreted sources, positive book reviews from recognized places.

I enjoyed it, and it has promoted some interesting discussion as well as new contributors and inspired me to want to know more about Chinese history. I did like the writing style overall. It was exciting and engaging. I also think I'll retain the information longer in my memory. I really enjoy history books as an adult (didn't care for it as a subject in school), and I wish more were written in an accessible tone and not dryly academic. On the other hand, there were a few times when I thought word choices to be sophomoric and not what I would have used. I felt at times her writing was too "fan-girlish," although I wished I knew more about history to have a valid, informed opinion. In this regard, I was disappointed that she did not present more detailed evidence of the "other side."

[issybird]

I tried to be explicit that I didn't criticize Cixi as a choice (I voted for it; moreover, I enjoyed it), but that having read it, I was again interested in trying to define parameters for literary non-fiction, since I didn't think it made the grade. As has been pointed out and I absolutely agree, you take your best shot when nominating, but you can't tell until you've read a book - and even then people can disagree.

In considering some of our choices, I think we all agree (and I could be wrong) that the beautifully-written A Time of Gifts qualifies as a literary work. But then Conquest of the Incas didn't qualify for desrtblues. For me, it did; the rigor of the scholarship and the quality of the writing that rendered the world of the Incas virtually palpable to me put it in the literary class. On the other hand, even when I nominated Testament of Youth, I had reservations about its status as literary. An important and well-written book, yes, but I still don't know that it hits the literary mark.

I'm not trying to limit our choices! I think we all agree that we do aspire to a certain standard of literariness or quality (which seems to me an easier distinction when it comes to non-fiction), that's the point of the club. So I think a discussion, to the extent people want to discuss it, can be interesting even though we've been there before. I also think it's a reasonable point of discussion for any book that's chosen, even if we don't care to take it outside a particular work.

[Bookworm_Girl]

No worries. I didn't think you were being critical of the choice and thought it a valid discussion point. I am glad that you raised it.

I know I struggle with what kind of criteria works for non-fiction. Although I also struggle with the issue that I don't feel like I necessarily know even after I read it. I download samples, seek out reviews and still don't necessarily know. My analytical mind tries to bound it by a set of questions but that doesn't help either. So then I think the most indicative criteria is if the author is recognized as literary or has won particular awards. But then I feel like that is too restrictive and might not have worked in this case anyway.

[ccowie]

Overall I think I enjoyed the book more that you did Issybird, but I'm in complete agreement with you regarding its literariness (not sure that's a word). I had the same thought many times as I read the book.

I certainly have read many non-fiction books and biographies that to me would qualify as literary. My criteria edges more toward the writing style than how ground-breaking the material is. I would also classify many spiritual works as literary including the writings of Thomas Merton, Henri Nouwen and even Jean Vanier.

Good point from Bookpossum: how can we actually know whether or not the criteria has been met when we haven't read the book.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by bfisher

Cixi never ruled in her own right, but as a regent for the titular Emperor. Therefore, lacking legitimacy, her power was limited to decreeing what was acceptable to most of the grandees. As long as she was proposing things that would maintain or strengthen the existing power structure, the grandees as a group would have been prepared to go along with her. When she sent her eunuch favorite An Dehai on the silk procurement trip, it was unnecessary, as there was an existing system for doing that; she wasn't trying to resolve a crisis. Worse, she sent a eunuch out as the head of an official mission, which scandalized the grandees, even those who usually supported Cixi.

Executing An Dehai offended nobody but Cixi, and would have pleased almost everyone else in China.

At the same time, since her son has 13, and would normally be expected to assume power at 14. Cixi would have been seen as a lame-duck regent, so anyone who contemplated do something that might offend Cixi may not have worried about retribution from Cixi.

I suppose then that what was misleading in the book was that it was presented at times before and after this section as if Cixi had much more power than all that.

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

This sounds like good careful reading.

This whole time the Qing Dynasty was dying. Chang certainly mentions this, as in statements about how the court would never be the same after the Boxer rebellion.

How much to focus on the life, and how much on the times, has to be a dilemma for any biographer. It seems to me Chang heavily puts the focus on the life of Cixi. But it's not like there is some standard reliable account of who was really in charge at every moment, and it is being hidden from us.

If you haven't finished you might not want to read this yet, but here is the one most simultaneously scholarly and negative review I found:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...76477589,d.cWc

I think reviewer Pamela Crossley is right that Chang pushes her Cixi-the-powerful thesis quite hard. But, as far as I can tell, Crossley's alternative story -- essentially, that Cixi was controlled by the Beiyand Army -- is far from proven. And I didn't like the sneering tone of Crossley's review.

Thanks for the review; I'm going to read it. I think you're quite right that perhaps there is no way to know exactly how much power Cixi had vs the grandees, but I would've appreciated it if that were made clear in the book. Instead, I feel that Chang presented her thesis as factual while flitting back and forth between presenting Cixi as powerful and weak with no overarching transitional explanations between these disparities.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by issybird

...As an aside, because I didn’t want to fall too far behind, I ended up listening to the audiobook and the narration by Jolene Kim was dreadful. Mispronunciations, errors that she corrected rather than rerecording the muffed bit, and worst of all, pacing that made frequent pauses where there was no punctuation. Unfortunately it’s the only version I see available from Audible and OverDrive in the US; obviously sun surfer had a better experience...

Oh yes, I first sampled the one by Jolene Kim and it sounded horrid. I simply travelled by internet to find and purchase the wonderful version by Pik-sen Lim.

[paola]

So finally I've managed to finish it - it took me a long time simply because I still find it quite hard this year to find time for reading: the book definitely flows!

Having said that, although I did enjoy it, I also had very many eye-rolling moments:

Originally Posted by sun surfer

there are many small assumptions on the author's part throughout. This sort of thing normally makes me wary in factual non-fiction, but before voting I'd read a sample and didn't find it bothersome. I think her skill at writing an engaging story and her thorough research more than make up for it - or, at least, that's what I think from the part I've gotten through so far anyway.

Originally Posted by sun surfer

It doesn't make sense. If she ruled with the red ink stamps, then how were the others able to have her eunuch lover executed? Couldn't she have just made a decree with the stamp?

Originally Posted by issybird

That said, Chang still lost me. Part of this was her fangirlish style. It didn’t read like serious history, but more like a high school theme with all the passion and blindness to alternative theories that implies. Ultimately, it was just silly. In overselling her case, she undermined it.

...

Some of the book was unintentionally amusing, as Chang tried to avoid her own entanglements. I loved how it was ok because Cixi didn’t steal a lot of money from the Navy, only a little. And there was no way, given her biases, that Chang could make sense of Cixi’s agency in the Boxer Rebellion.

very much agree with all of the above: and I wish Chang had given us more in terms of historical background to what was going on in the rest of society: in this respect I think I got more out of Pearl Buck than this book. In short, I was disappointed: I too know very little about China and its history, but even so there are obvious gaps and sudden changes of direction which simply make no sense, and left me with the feeling I had missed some important, sizeable chunk somewhere. Cixi's attitudes to her people, as well as her people attitude towards her, change suddenly and with no apparent reason: of course I get this is not even aiming at being scholarly work, but it still left me rather dissatisfied, at least compared to what it could have been. Mind you, I did enjoy it, but I think Chang could have done much more with it...

[paola]

and forgot to say, thank you all for the links to the interviews and reviews, extremely helpful!