Talk:Man Jiang Hong

Manjiang Hong is not a poem (诗), it's a 词. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Author

From LOCH note:

岳飞《满江红》词脍炙人口，但不见于宋人记载。岳飞之孙岳珂编集《金陀萃编》及《经进家集》，遍录岳飞之诗文奏章,此……

so some sources suggest this poem was not written by Yue Fei actually, but by later author. HELLO, WORLD! 15:44, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no discussion on LOCH on this... or on anything else for that matter. What are you talking about??? :-S -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By Chinese google, there does exist argument about this, but overall the evidence seems not strong enough yet. Took 06:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/5442416.html --70.21.24.197 04:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added material from scholarly sources that state Yue fei is not the author of the poem. (Ghostexorcist 06:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

POV material that will be removed

"It is a testament to Yue Fei's unwavering patriotism to China, and a scathing full-on attack on the dynasty's cowardice in the face of the Jin Dynasty of the North."

Although they have stated they are not the original author, an anonymous editor keeps re-adding the above material to the "basis" section. The section is POV because it speaks of the Song Dynasty's cowardice. A better statement would be "it spotlighted the Song's inability to stand against the Jin Dynasty." But most importantly, Yue Fei did not write the poem, so the statement is incorrect. I do not want to violate the WP:3RR rule, so I will wait several hours before removing it. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was the "anonymous editor". I have just registered.

But "keep re-adding" material that you disagreed with? - name me just one instance please. I fully agreed with you that Yue wasn't killed because he wrote the poem, which was why that wasn't reinstated.

Further, the "but it stays" bit - what gave you even the slightest idea that I intend to remove Prof Liu's perspective? Evidence?

Or are you simply trying to silence other views by resorting to "trumped-up charges"?

Anyway, our differences are not at all that great. I agree that "it spotlighted the Song's inability to stand against the Jin Dynasty" is better - just go ahead with that.

But I have to point out where you were wrong. First, the original "POV" material actually meant to say (I think) that Yue was killed because of his "unwavering patriotism" (not shared by Gaozong and Qin), not because he wrote the poem. Second, and more importantly, the poem can actually be said to be "a testament of Yue's...", 'even if' it was written by the "Real Author", who explicitly mentions the Jingkang Incident etc. and who "who engraved it on a tablet at Yueh Fei’s tomb". Most sources who doubt Yue's authorship do not doubt the clear associations of the poem to Yue's life.

Just go ahead and re-write the section. Perhaps it would be good idea to re-name "Basis" as "Poem's Content" or something.

May I also "suggest" that the lead be re-worded as follows: "If unspecified, it most often refers to the one normally attributed to legendary Song Dynasty general and Chinese national hero Yue Fei. However, some sources, such as Princeton University History Professor James T.C. Liu, have thrown doubt on the authorship and dating of Yue's version.[1]", or something along that line. As users HELLO, WORLD! and Took mentioned above, the sources merely "suggest" an alternative view, and AFAIK, no mainstream literature textbooks have entirely ruled out Yue being the author. Actually such doubts have been raised througouht Chinese history, as borne out by the Chinese quote above. One common response is that Yue Ke did not include the poem because of its sensitive nature - even though Gaozong's successor had retroactively reinstated Yue's reputation, Qin Hui's proteges still wielded considerable influence within the Song court. Not to mention the fact that Gaozong was the Emperor, after all.Multi56 (talk) 01:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You continued to re-add the pov section. My "but it stays" comment was directed to your changing of the wording of a cited sentence. You can't change something like that without knowing the details of what the source states. And saying he was killed for his loyalty is incorrect. He was executed because his actions at court and on the battle field appeared seditious to the Emperor. By the time of his arrest, Yue was a lowly civilian. He was later executed for the trumped up charges based on his former actions. Anyway, saying it was a "a testament of Yue's..." is an assumption based on the claim that Yue wrote the poem. He is not even mentioned therein.

In regards to HELLO, WORLD! and TOOK, a footnote from a fictional novel is hardly a scholarly source. If you can find a source that mentions that some modern scholars believe it was written by Yue, please feel free to add it to the page. But the material has to refute the exact Ming Dynasty origin. There are lots of western books that blindly ascribe the poem to Yue Fei. No doubt they are unaware of actual research into the poem's history.

Prof. Liu was not the person who originally came up with the concept of the 1502 date. Liu was just noting the other scholar's findings in his research paper on Yue Fei. Here is the citation Liu gives "Hsia Ch’eng-t’ao, “Yüeh Fei ‘Man-chiang-hung’ tz’u k’ao-pien,” Chūgoku bungaku hō, Kyoto, 10 (1962), 56–63. See also an article by Professor Jao Tsung-yi in Pan tai hsüeh-pao, No. 2 (University of Malaya, 1963)." --Ghostexorcist (talk) 03:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you allegations are unfounded - "keep re-adding" or "continued to re-add" - like, WHEN?

And you misunderstand - Whoever the "Real Author" was, he was making clear references to Yue Fei.

And it's not just Western books; I'm not aware of many (if any) Chinese textbooks that have come to the conclusion that it definitely wasn't Yue.

That said, I am not necessarily disagreeing with you (or with the academics you mentioned) here, as I have already made clear. All I'm asking is that the lead be made as close to NPOV as possible. I hope and trust that you'll start to assume good faith. Over and out.Multi56 (talk) 03:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to you "re-adding" material, I was referring to the edits here and here. What ever the original author's intentions where, the statement was not neutral. However, we have agreed to rewrite it. I know you are not the person who added the incorrect material about Yue's execution. Also, I have already said "that works in the lead" (see here), meaning I had no problem with the addition of Prof. Liu's name to the opening paragraph. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 04:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn to read poetry in Mandarin.

Please learn to read poetry in Mandarin. You can't just look characters up in a modern dictionary and put Pinyin on them. There is a process. Here are .pdfs. Here and here are videos.174.23.230.220 (talk) 04:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited your hidden statement so to reflect an image of professionalism. This is an encyclopedia and not some forum. Please try to write your statements in a manner that doesn't sound condescending. I believe the person who added the transcription of the poem copied it--characters and pinyin--from a source online. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 12:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great pdf resources - thank you! Hakseng (talk) 01:43, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Man Jiang Hong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050831032915/http://chinapage.com/poet-e/yuehfei2e.html to http://www.chinapage.com/poet-e/yuehfei2e.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]