285:: I don't think "pages" is super useful as an unqualified measure of length. Does this mean that the original manuscript is 47 pages, or the 1763 first printed edition, or some other edition, or the English translation? Even typesetting can make an enormous difference! Can you clarify what this refers to? (To take an example from my own speciality, translations of
42:
540:
Yeah, I can see what you are trying to do, and we should definitely say that commentators have seen it as the first pornographic work in
Chinese! I think rewriting it so as not to quote Stone directly helps in not making it seem that he necessarily agrees with that view, here – how does my attempt
485:
It does seem to be the consensus of most critics though but I found Stone to be a convenient source in general, so I leaned on it more. My intention wasn't to include really in-depth scholarly analysis, but just an overview of its role and place in literary history. In any case, I'm not quoting the
412:
But the source cited doesn't quite say this; it says that Liu Hui believes this, and that
Charles Stone believes that the preface and postscript are dated to 1634 and 1760 respectively! This is a very substantial disagreement. Both H. Laura Wu (in Huang 2004, p.203) and Martin Huang (Huang 2020
525:
I didn't intend to suggest that Stone said it--but as you mention he is indeed summarising the view of other commentators, and I thought it would be appropriate to use this citation to support the fact that, well, it's "Arguably the first pornographic work in the
Chinese language", insofar as I
370:
It's picky, but a novella is generally used for shorter works, and novels for longer ones. In modern pro publishing, the division is around the 50,000 word mark, although in historical use like this it's more variable. I think we should try to be consistent however.
526:
couldn't find a more handy source summarising the view of other commentators. A little roundabout way of explaining the citation, but was I supposed to cite multiple commentators (such as those whose views are summarised by Stone) instead to prove that point?
245:
a thirty-year-old virgin who is rumoured to have "prodigious natural endowments" and is later conferred the title of "Ruyijun" or "Lord of
Perfect Satisfaction" by Empress Wu Zetian after she summons him into her quarters to personally confirm said
184:
Both the lead and the body say "it was constantly banned after its publication". It's unclear to me exactly what this means – I imagine that it has been banned several times, but perhaps that it has been banned continuously from publication to the
509:(as our use of the quote suggests) arguing that RZ is the first pornographic work in Chinese; he is summarising the view of other commentators! His own view (p.17) is that RZ "has little in common with these definitions ".
604:
Okay, I've just had a final read-through and I'm happy with the article as it stands. This is the part where I do the formal box-ticking and ribbon-cutting bit, I think. Congratulations on your new Good
Article!
475:
given that it predominantly uses
Charles Stone as a reference, I'm very confused by the fact that the only analysis of the work in our article is of a piece of pornography, when Stone's central thesis is that it
350:
The article twice refers to
Ruyijun zhuan as a novel, and three times as a novella. The boundary between the two is fairly fuzzy, but I would consider novels and novellas to be distinct. Can we be consistent
316:"barely amounts to forty-five pages and is written in condensed classical Chinese". So I'd think it's safe to assume that this refers to the original manuscript but I'll remove it if you think that's better.
248:
entirely duplicates facts we already know from the prior section, with the exception of the fact that Xue is 30. I would suggest fitting that into the plot summary and cutting the rest, leaving something
413:
p.115) report this disagreement without taking a side on it, which suggests to me that the matter isn't conclusively settled, and
Knowledge should not be reporting one possible date as fact.
257:
chronicles Wu Zetian's rise to power, while detailing her numerous sexual encounters, especially with the male protagonist Xue Aocao. Apart from Xue, all of the empress' lovers depicted in
222:
The image of a snail is obviously a snail; the caption would be better to explain the relevance of the snail to the article – i.e. that Xue's penis is said to be like a snail in the text
486:
Stone quote ("most
Chinese erotic fiction written during the next hundred years was ultimately inspired by the Ruyijun zhuan or borrowed from its vocabulary") out of context, am I?
298:
If I'm not mistaken the source doesn't clarify what that refers to either. Just remove? That said, the
English translation isn't only 47 pages long, I don't think.
80:
356:
I thought they were interchangeable -- like one being a subset of the other -- but since the source specifies that it's a novella I'll go ahead and just do that.
47:
70:
388:
This is a super interesting article. That's all I picked up on my first pass-through, but I'm going to want to dig into this one properly – more soon!
418:
Ok, I have tweaked it to possibly reflect the disagreement a bit better, but it feels like a mouthful to me now. Further suggestions are most welcome.
449:
Huang is also made what is believed to be the earliest known reference to Ruyijun zhuan in a three-page-long essay published between 1525 and 1540.
410:
The preface and postscript of the novella are dated 1514 and 1520 respectively, suggesting that the story itself was written sometime in between
156:
126:
122:
52:
107:
330:
I think your solution here of quoting Stone directly is fine; I've changed the infobox number to 45 to align with the Stone quote.
451:
Of the three sources cited for this claim, one of them explicitly contradicts it – Hanan dates the first reference to RZ to 1561!
456:
Wasn't sure how to work that disagreement in without seeming too convoluted -- so I've just removed the third citation for now?
75:
204:
Checking the source, it says "banned several times"; I have changed the article text to "repeatedly banned" to clarify this.
99:
610:
576:
546:
514:
437:
393:
376:
335:
209:
171:
150:
595:
562:
531:
491:
461:
423:
361:
321:
303:
271:
232:
195:
606:
588:
572:
542:
510:
433:
389:
372:
331:
205:
167:
146:
243:
The section on composition begins by restating quite a lot of the plot section above. In particular,
591:
558:
527:
487:
457:
419:
357:
317:
299:
267:
228:
191:
115:
17:
403:
Sorry for the delay in getting into this - I was ill the week after I wrote my initial comments!
557:
Thanks for the comments, and no worries about the delay -- hope you've recovered fully! :)
289:
run from half a page of the Loeb edition, to nearly two (rather larger!) pages in Carson's
587:
Love the changes you made and the general insight that you've offered. Thank you so much
432:
Did a little bit of rejigging the sentence breaks. Hopefully flows a little better now?
505:
this is a super misleading quote. It's cited to Stone, and while he did write it, he
92:
286:
614:
599:
580:
566:
550:
535:
518:
495:
465:
441:
427:
397:
380:
365:
339:
325:
307:
275:
236:
213:
199:
175:
160:
227:
I just removed the snail image since it wasn't so helpful to begin with
571:
I've made a few tweaks to the text. Let me know how you like them.
472:
I'm also having problems with the "literary significance" section:
190:
As far as I can recall the source doesn't elaborate on that either
503:
arguably the "first pornographic work in the Chinese language".
312:
Stone's translation is 20ish pages long and he writes that the
406:
I have some problems with the "publication history" section:
134:
103:
166:
I will review this article - initial comments shortly
266:Done, with just a sliver of extra info remaining
8:
30:
283:Ruyijun zhuan is forty-seven pages long
61:
33:
502:
448:
409:
282:
253:
244:
7:
24:
398:20:07, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
176:18:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
161:18:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
1:
615:17:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
600:16:59, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
581:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
567:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
551:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
536:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
519:20:00, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
496:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
466:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
442:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
428:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
381:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
366:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
340:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
326:10:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
308:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
276:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
237:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
214:16:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
200:19:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
633:
261:are historical figures.
480:primarily pornography.
180:General comments:
18:Talk:Ruyijun zhuan
89:
88:
624:
607:Caeciliusinhorto
589:Caeciliusinhorto
573:Caeciliusinhorto
543:Caeciliusinhorto
511:Caeciliusinhorto
434:Caeciliusinhorto
390:Caeciliusinhorto
373:Caeciliusinhorto
332:Caeciliusinhorto
206:Caeciliusinhorto
168:Caeciliusinhorto
147:Caeciliusinhorto
139:
130:
111:
43:Copyvio detector
31:
632:
631:
627:
626:
625:
623:
622:
621:
120:
97:
91:
85:
57:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
630:
628:
620:
619:
618:
617:
585:
584:
583:
555:
554:
553:
523:
522:
521:
499:
498:
482:
481:
470:
469:
468:
453:
452:
445:
444:
416:
415:
414:
404:
386:
385:
384:
383:
353:
352:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
295:
294:
291:If Not, Winter
279:
278:
251:
250:
240:
239:
224:
223:
219:
218:
217:
216:
187:
186:
165:
140:
87:
86:
84:
83:
78:
73:
67:
64:
63:
59:
58:
56:
55:
53:External links
50:
45:
39:
36:
35:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
629:
616:
612:
608:
603:
602:
601:
597:
593:
592:Kingoflettuce
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:
568:
564:
560:
559:Kingoflettuce
556:
552:
548:
544:
539:
538:
537:
533:
529:
528:Kingoflettuce
524:
520:
516:
512:
508:
504:
501:
500:
497:
493:
489:
488:Kingoflettuce
484:
483:
479:
474:
473:
471:
467:
463:
459:
458:Kingoflettuce
455:
454:
450:
447:
446:
443:
439:
435:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
420:Kingoflettuce
417:
411:
408:
407:
405:
402:
401:
400:
399:
395:
391:
382:
378:
374:
369:
368:
367:
363:
359:
358:Kingoflettuce
355:
354:
349:
348:
341:
337:
333:
329:
328:
327:
323:
319:
318:Kingoflettuce
315:
314:Ruyijun zhuan
311:
310:
309:
305:
301:
300:Kingoflettuce
297:
296:
292:
288:
284:
281:
280:
277:
273:
269:
268:Kingoflettuce
265:
264:
263:
262:
260:
259:Ruyijun zhuan
256:
255:Ruyijun zhuan
247:
242:
241:
238:
234:
230:
229:Kingoflettuce
226:
225:
221:
220:
215:
211:
207:
203:
202:
201:
197:
193:
192:Kingoflettuce
189:
188:
183:
182:
181:
178:
177:
173:
169:
163:
162:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
66:
65:
60:
54:
51:
49:
46:
44:
41:
40:
38:
37:
32:
26:
19:
506:
477:
387:
313:
290:
258:
254:
252:
179:
164:
153:
143:
142:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
90:
81:Instructions
104:visual edit
48:Authorship
34:GA toolbox
287:Sappho 16
144:Reviewer:
71:Templates
62:Reviewing
27:GA Review
185:present?
157:contribs
76:Criteria
127:history
108:history
94:Article
541:look?
246:rumour
507:isn't
478:isn't
351:here?
249:like:
136:Watch
16:<
611:talk
596:talk
577:talk
563:talk
547:talk
532:talk
515:talk
492:talk
462:talk
438:talk
424:talk
394:talk
377:talk
362:talk
336:talk
322:talk
304:talk
272:talk
233:talk
210:talk
196:talk
172:talk
151:talk
123:edit
100:edit
613:)
598:)
579:)
565:)
549:)
534:)
517:)
494:)
464:)
440:)
426:)
396:)
379:)
364:)
338:)
324:)
306:)
274:)
235:)
212:)
198:)
174:)
159:)
125:|
106:|
102:|
609:(
594:(
575:(
561:(
545:(
530:(
513:(
490:(
460:(
436:(
422:(
392:(
375:(
360:(
334:(
320:(
302:(
293:)
270:(
231:(
208:(
194:(
170:(
154:·
149:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.