Talk:Zhang Zongchang

Untitled

Were the concubines sex-slaves, prisoners, or something else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.87.10 (talk) 20:14, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Some sources seem slightly suspect

In the "Personal Life" section, when discussing Zongchang's poetry, not only are sources [8] and [13] the same, but they link to what appears to be a very un-academic, unsourced, potentially incorrect site. The brief, insignificant amount of digging that I've done on this reveals no other sources that confirm the last quote, or even some of the poems as Zongchang's work, but then again I'm bad at digging and this is my first ever contribution to a page that isn't typographical. I'm not entirely certain what to do here, but I think it would be prudent to either find a more reliable source than "http://thissiteisbestviewed.com/2018/11/24/the-profane-poetry-of-zhang-zongchang/" as this questionable source is the only thing that backs up the alleged quote about the temple. I haven't yet made any edits or changes as I'm not entirely certain how to properly do so, but this seems like something that should be cleared up at least. Also, when I clicked on edit mode (using the visual editor), source [13] changed into [10]. I'm too new to editing things to know if this is a common bug or something else, but either way, does anyone know why this happened? Spectrefish (talk) 08:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

The poem is actually 100% real; Chinese newspapers and academic sources have mentioned it. These mentions usually do not include English translations, however, resulting in the use of a not-so-good source. I agree with you that another source would be much better; perhaps we should just quote a Chinese newspaper and give our own translation. The shift during edit mode probably results from you trying to edit just one section - as result, less references are shown, and the numbering consequently changes. Applodion (talk) 11:39, 15 December 2019 (PDT)

It is good, and indeed interesting to confirm that these masterpieces of poetry are indeed real. Your suggested approach of quoting a Chinese newspaper seems to be the best recourse, though I, sadly, know nothing of the Chinese language or Wikipedia editing procedure; I fear that I would be worthless in such an endeavor as quoting something in Chinese. Your concise explanation of the source-shift is also much appreciated, thank you. I defer to your greater experience; whatever you think should be done I am inclined to encourage it and help in any way that I can.

Sorry for taking so long to reply; I thought that there was an email notification system in place for replies and thus did not check this page manually until now. Also, I don't exactly know how to properly reply, so I've edited my response directly into the talk-page section - I hope that this is indeed what one is supposed to do. Spectrefish (talk) 00:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Spectrefish: No problem. The purpose of talk pages is to discuss issues such as these, so you did well. In regards to the quote, I will try to find a solution. Anyways, the article is currently sub-par anyways; I hope to improve it at some point in the future. By the way, one thing I find fascinating about Zhang Zongchang is that he was probably far less dumb than his critics and own statements might suggest; his bullish behavior was probably partially motivated from conscious self-presentation, an attempt to endear himself toward his base of power - his soldiers who appreciated his crude behavior. Accordingly, his poems and some of his actions have been interpreted by some sinologists as self-deprecating jokes which simultaneously signified his might. His poetry might have been horrible, but at the same time it was remarkable for a Chinese commoner because a) it was funny and down-to-earth (in a society where class differences were big), b) it came from a man who had no educated background, someone who had begun with nothing and now could read, write, and do poetry (a pasttime for the elite!), and c) the poems quasi-mocked traditions and the educated through their rude contents (he debased this high art, and mocked the gods, yet could do all that without consequences!). Applodion (talk) 11:53, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Applodion: To know so much about Zhang Zongchang must bring oneself joy; the man seems as flamboyant as any I've heard of. I must agree with your point that Zhang was more clever than many give him credit for; appearing uneducated or stupid to increase one's popular appeal is an effective strategy, and, when executed correctly, it goes undetected - with Zhang being as reviled as he is, it seems that his strategy may have 'worked'. Furthermore, ensuring that one's soldiers are loyal to oneself has always been a necessity for any warlord, and Zhang was clearly adept at this as you say; I must, however, disagree when you say that his poetry is horrible - it's some of the most entertaining prose I've ever had the pleasure to read, and I daresay its quality exceeds that of many poets, modern or otherwise! Were he not a warlord, he could have made a living as a comedian, I'm sure! Whatever the case, may your solution prove effective, and may all your future editing be met with good fortune; also, happy holidays. Spectrefish (talk) 05:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC) 05:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@Spectrefish: Thank you for your kind words! I wish you a happy holiday as well. Applodion (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)