The Japanese Society for Aesthetics

Aesthetics No.28 (2024): 76-90

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism
in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory *YI Ding
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Kyoto University), Kyoto
Abstract: This paper aims to clarify the transition process of Zong Baihua’s application of Confucianism(Kongzi, Mengzi) and Taoism (Laozi, Zhuangzi) for the purpose of establishing his unique Chinese art theory
from the 1930s to the 1970s. In his earliest Chinese art theory in 1932, Zong defined the ideal “aesthetics” as adiscipline that takes distinct phenomena of art in certain cultures into accounts while reflecting the cosmic view
pursued by the culture. At that time, he mainly referred to the concepts of Confucianism and Taoism to explain
Chinese pre-modern art theory and art phenomena. However, after the 1960s, he reconsidered the role playedby classic philosophy in “aesthetics” and thus turned to utilize pre-modern art theory, instead of classic
philosophy, to re-explain art phenomena, while attempted to construct a mutual complementation system ofConfucianism and Taoism as the reflection of cosmic view underlying Chinese art phenomena.
Keywords: Zong Baihua, Modern Chinese Art Theory, Confucianism, Taoism, Qi-yun Sheng-dong

1. Introduction: Regarding prior research on Zong BaihuaZong Baihua (1897-1986) is a representative Chinese aesthetician of the 20th century. He
studied a wide range of Eastern and Western disciplines, and in particular applied Chineseclassical philosophical thought to Chinese art theory, which exerted a decisive influence on thesubsequent development of Chinese art theory. According to “Formation of Modern Chinese
Aesthetics” included in Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, he is categorized as a second-generation
scholar in China during the formation of “aesthetics” as a discipline1. Compared to the firstgeneration scholars like Wang Guowei, Cai Yuanpei, and Liang Qichao, this generation had adeeper understanding of both Eastern and Western thought and a better environment for studying
abroad. In this milieu, two of the 20th century’s greatest aestheticians, Zhu Guangqian (18971986) and Zong Baihua, emerged. In general, Zhu Guangqian’s style is more in line with modern
Western aesthetics, emphasizing clarity and precision, while Zong Baihua’s style is known for
its emotive expressions, which could be appreciated as literary works themselves.
However, due to this expressive style, it is challenging to delineate the core of Zong Baihua’s
theories. There is a wealth of research on him in China, but the development of his ideas remains
unclear, with a tendency to mix his discourses from different periods or to cite without considering* This paper is based on the Japanese version printed in Bigaku 72, No. 2, 2021, pp. 12-23, published by theJapanese Society for Aesthetics.
1
See Zang, Xinming, “Formation of Modern Chinese aesthetics,” in The Japanese Society for Aesthetics (ed.),Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, Tokyo: Maruzen Publishing, 2020.

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory

77

context while explaining his thoughts. To understand some aspects of this issue, let us look at theargument of Ye Lang (1938-), an important researcher of Zong Baihua and a student of his.
In his Outline of Chinese Aesthetics History (1985), Ye Lang attempted to construct Chinese
aesthetic history based on the achievements of modern aesthetics research, tracing its roots backto pre-Qin thought. In this context, Zong Baihua’s ideas are frequently cited2. For instance, in thefirst chapter, third section, Ye Lang discusses how Laozi’s thought is reflected in the phenomenonof Chinese art, using Zong Baihua’s 1979 article “Preliminary Exploration of the History ofChinese Aesthetics (hereafter denoted as “Preliminary Exploration”)”3 as a reference.
However, as mentioned later in this paper, in the 1970s, Zong Baihua had already departed
from his stance of the 1930s and 1940s, where he directly interpreted the phenomenon of Chinese
art through classical philosophy. Hence, Ye Lang’s reference does not align with Zong Baihua’s
actual intentions at the time. Similar problems can be observed in other significant research works
on Zong Baihua, such as Lin Tonghua’s Research on Zong Baihua’s Aesthetic Thought (1987),
Zou Shifang’s Biography and Critique of Zong Baihua (1989), and Yun Huixia’s Research on
Zong Baihua’s Literary and Artistic Thought (2009)4. Although Zong maintained concerns heheld in the 1930s, his academic stance had undergone significant changes. The aim of this thesis
is to clarify the process of this transformation.
In recent years, there has been increasing attention to the chronological changes in Zong
Baihua’s Chinese art theory. For instance, Sun Zongmei (2014) has focused on the issue of“symbolism” and pointed out the shift in Zong’s attention towards Zhuangzi within Taoist
thought5. Additionally, Jin Lang (2016) has highlighted Zong’s growing interest in Confucian
thought during the 1940s, where his focus changed from Confucian moral perspectives to
Confucian influence on the arts 6 . However, these observations are somewhat abridged andconcentrate only on certain aspects of Zong’s discourse.
In contrast, this paper will extensively re-evaluate Zong Baihua’s arguments from the 1930s
to the 1970s, with a central theme of the application of Confucian thought (represented by
Confucius and Mencius)7 and Taoist thought (represented by Laozi and Zhuangzi). At each stage,
the study will examine what classical philosophical content Zong Baihua applied and how hereferred to it. To comprehensively understand the evolution of Zong’s Chinese art theory, it is2

Ye, Lang, Outline of the History of Chinese Aesthetics, Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2017.
This paper is based on Zong Baihua’s manuscripts from 1960 to 1963 and the Chinese Aesthetics History
Course at Peking University in 1963. It was organized by Ye Lang, who was serving as an assistant to Zong at thattime.
4E.g., Lin, Tonghua, Research on Zong Baihua’s Aesthetic Thought, Shenyang: Liaoning People’s Publishing
House, 1987; Zou, Shifang, Biographical Evaluation of Zong Baihua, Hong Kong: Hong Kong News Publishing
House, 1989; Yun, Huixia, Research on Zong Baihua’s Literary and Artistic Thought, Beijing: China Social Sciences
Press, 2009.
5
Sun, Zongmei, “The Concept of ‘Yijing [Aesthetic Realm]’ and Taoist Thought: Analyzing Exemplary Cases
in Modern Chinese Aesthetics Research,” in Journal of Wuhan University (Humanities Edition), Vol. 67, No. 6, 2014.
6
Jin, Lang, “Aesthetic Interpretation of Confucian Ritual and Music: Simultaneous Analysis of the Aesthetic
Discourses of Zhu Guangqian and Zong Baihua during the Anti-Japanese War Period,” in Literary and Artistic
Debate, Issue 11, 2016.
7
While Zong Baihua frequently discusses Xunzi’s thought and the Yijing, both associated with Confucianism,
this paper does not touch upon these topics.
3

78

YI Dingessential not only to analyze the ratio of citations from Confucian thought and Taoist thought but
also to elucidate the roles these two philosophical traditions played in shaping his artistic theories.

2. 1932 - References to Classical Philosophy in the Early Period
2.1 Background of Zong Baihua’s Application of Classical Philosophical thought
In the year 1932, Zong Baihua authored two essays: “Introducing Two Books on Chinese
Painting Studies and Discussing Chinese Painting” (abbreviated as “Chinese Painting Studies”
hereafter) and “Xu Beihong and Chinese Painting.” These writings constitute Zong’s earlyorganized discourse on Chinese art theory. According to “Chinese Painting Studies,”
What is the deepest spirit [心] conveyed by Chinese painting? The answer is not one thatworships and imitates the world as a finite, harmonious realization [like ancient Greekart], nor is it an endless pursuit of the infinite world with anguish and restlessness [asseen in post-Renaissance art]. The spirit [精神] that seeks to express it is a kind of“profound and tranquil merging with this infinite nature and universe in a state of blend
and harmony.” (Ⅱ, 44)8What Zong Baihua explores of Chinese art is about the concept of “spirit [心] .” In this context,“spirit” implies an understanding of the universe and life, which is further linked to Zong’s
understanding of the discipline of “aesthetics [美学].”
The study of aesthetics should encompass the entire realm of aesthetic objects, including
cosmic beauty, the beauty of life, and artistic beauty. However, traditional aesthetics hasoften focused solely on artistic beauty or considered it as the primary starting point forstudy…. [Nonetheless,] each individual art form has its own unique worldview andemotional connection to life, serving as its deepest foundation. (Ⅱ,43)
As the previous study pointed out, Zong Baihua’s emphasis on the “spirit” of art andunderstanding of the cosmos is rooted in Oswald Spengler’s cultural morphology. According toWang Yichuan (2016), Spengler’s idea that “each culture has a unique Culture-soul (die Seele
einer Kultur),” which reflects a “completely distinct way of observing and understanding thenatural world in each culture,” is considered one of the Western thoughts that had the mostinfluence on Zong Baihua in the 1930s and 1940s9.
On the other hand, Zong Baihua’s idea that cultural differences in art must be taken into
account seems to have been influenced by Max Dessoir’s idea of “Kunstwissenschaft.” Dessoir
was Zong’s teacher during his studies at the University of Berlin (1920-25), and upon his return
8

In the following, citations from Zong Baihua’s works are provided from The Complete Works of Zong Baihua,
edited by Lin Tonghua in four volumes (published by Hefei: Anhui Education Press, 1994), in the form of (Vol. Page).
The English translations from Zong’s works in this paper were undertaken by the author.
9
Wang, Yichuan, “The German ‘Culture-soul theory” in China: A Case Study of Zong Baihua’s ‘Spirit ofChinese Art,’” in Peking University Journal (Philosophy and Social Sciences), Vol. 53, No. 2, 2016, pp. 60-61.

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory

79

to China, Zong wrote the following in his manuscript on “Aesthetics” (1926 to 1928):
Aestheticians often use several principles of beauty as standards (e.g., Greek paintings)
or employ various specific methods for critique. However, this cannot be universally
applied to all forms of art. This is because art varies with the changes in each era, andtherefore, it becomes possible to discuss it only after isolating it. (I, 511)
Zong Baihua criticized traditional “aesthetics,” which prioritized theory, and instead sought a
discipline that discusses art with specific cultural contexts. So, how did Zong construct a new“Chinese art theory” with such characteristics, and what uniqueness did it have compared to other
Chinese art theories of the time? To answer this, let us examine his interpretation of the central
concept of “Qi-yun sheng-dong” (vitality of spirit and rhythm)10 in pre-modern painting theory
and his perspective on blank expression in the context of his two essays from 1932.
2.2 The “Dynamic” of Chinese Painting (Qi-yun Sheng-dong)Zong discussed “the deepest spirit conveyed by Chinese painting” in the essay “Chinese
painting studies:”
While the state it demonstrates is tranquil, the cosmos, which operates according to thelaws of nature, is both dynamic and tranquil. Likewise, a life align with the spirit of nature
is dynamic yet tranquil. The subjects portrayed within it, such as mountains, rivers,
people, flowers, birds, and insects, are all filled with the vitality of life— Qi-yun shengdong. However, since nature follows its own laws (what Laozi and Zhuangzi refer to as
the “Tao [道]”), and the painter harmonizes with nature, profound tranquility is concealed
within the canvas. (II, 44)
According to Zong, Chinese painting fundamentally aims for a state of “tranquility” while also
possessing qualities of “dynamics.” In previous studies, it has been noted that Zong regarded thespirit of Chinese art as “tranquil” by referencing the ideas of Laozi and Zhuangzi, thus pioneering
the view in the history of Chinese art theory11. However, the recognition of Western culture as“dynamic” and Chinese culture as “tranquil” in the context of the so-called “East-West Culture
Debate” that lasted from around 1915 to the 1920s had already gained wide acceptance12. Hence,
Zong’s examination of the “dynamic” elements stands out for its uniqueness.
The theory of “dynamics” here is explained by the central concept of pre-modern art theory,
10

For English translations of “qi-yun sheng-dong,” representative ones can be listed as “the life-movement of
the spirit through the rhythm of things” by Okakura Kakuzo (The Ideals of the East: With Special Reference to the
Art of Japan, 1903) and “rhythmic vitality” by H. A. Giles (An Introduction to the History of Chinese Pictorial Art,
1905).
11
See Niu, Guangbao, “Interpreting Western Aesthetics through the Traditional ‘Artistic Theory of Heart andSpirit,’” in Qiushi Academic Journal, 2001, Issue 3, pp. 72-79 etc.
12
The ‘East-West Cultural Debate’ is exemplified by the debate between La Jeunesse and The Eastern
Miscellany. Refer to Lin, Yusheng, etc., May Fourth: Multiple Reflections, Hong Kong: Joint Publishing, 1989;
Sakamoto, Hiroko, A History of Modern Chinese Thought and Culture, Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2016, pp. 139-147.

80

YI Ding“Qi-yun sheng-dong.” “Qi-yun sheng-dong” drew significant attention as a unique characteristicof Chinese art when traditional Chinese painting was criticized for lacking realism due to theimpact of Western painting in the 20th century13. An exemplary essay discussing this is Chen
Shizeng’s “The Value of Literati Painting” (1922). Chen Shizeng stated that “literati painting [,a representative style of Chinese painting,] places the highest importance on spirit and does notemphasize form. ... Hence [the painter] values ‘Qi-yun’ the most.”14 Here, “form” refers to the
pursuit of a western-like realism15. The term “Qi-yun,” signifying the spirit of literati painting, iscontrasted with this, and the conclusion of the same essay, i.e., “the elements of literati painting
are, first, moral character; second, scholarship; third, talent and taste [才情]; fourth, thought”16,
indicates that qi-yun originates from the artist’s spirit. The terminology of “Qi-yun sheng-dong”
here is close to that of the pre-modern era17.
In contrast, Zong Baihua brought about a change in the interpretation of the concept of “Qiyun sheng-dong” by referencing classical philosophy. In “Xu Beihong and Chinese Painting,” hesays:
In this cosmos, the consistent Way flows through all things, everywhere it goes. ... Laozi
calls this emptiness [虚無], but this emptiness is not true emptiness; it is the principle ofchaos and creation within the cosmos, and it is the so-called lively “Qi-yun” within therealm of painting. When a painter represents nature, they are expressing this lively “Qiyun.” ... “Qi-yun sheng-dong” is indeed the ultimate subject and result of painting. (II,50-51)
Zong Baihua also considered “Qi-yun sheng-dong” as a defining characteristic of Chinese
painting, but he viewed it as a reflection of Laozi’s “Way” and “emptiness” at the level of painting.
According to Zong, the artist harmonizes with nature, and the painting itself aims to embody
nature. Therefore, Chinese painting, with its direct connection to the “Qi-yun sheng-dong” thatis intertwined with nature and the cosmos, is considered by Zong to be nothing but the “mostobjective” and “most realistic” of works (II, 45-46). In this manner, “Qi-yun sheng-dong,”
combined with classical philosophy, rather than realism regarding form but in the sense of aiming
for the truth of the cosmos, obtained a different evaluation.
2.3 Blank Expression in Chinese Painting
During this period, Zong Baihua also emphasized the blank expression in Chinese painting,and he demonstrates the application of classical philosophy to the analysis of artistic phenomena.

13

For the criticism and re-evaluation of 20th-century Chinese painting, refer to Pan, Gongkai, translated by
Ishii, Satoru etc., The Way of Modern Chinese Art, Tokyo: Sayusha, 2020.
14
Chen, Shizeng, “The Value of Literati Painting,” in Wu, Xiaoming (ed.), Selected Essays on the Republic ofChina’s Painting Theory, Hangzhou: Xiling Seal Society Publishing House, 2013, p. 35.
15
Refer to the previous note 13, p. 38.
16
Refer to the previous note 13, p. 38.
17
Refer to Usami, Bunri, Chinese History of Art Theory: Philosophical Discourses, Kyoto: Sobunsha, 2015.

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory

81

Chinese people perceive the depth of the cosmos [depicted in painting] as an intangible
and colorless void, and this very void is, in fact, the source and essence of all things, an
unceasing creative force. Laozi and Zhuangzi refer to this as the “Tao,” “Nature,” and“Emptiness,” while Confucianism calls it “Heaven [天].” All things originate from
emptiness and return to emptiness. Therefore, the blank spaces on paper are the true
foundation of Chinese painting. … The blank spaces in Chinese painting are not a true
void in a literal sense; they are precisely where the spirit of the cosmos and life flows(i.e., “Qi-yun sheng-dong”). … This unpainted blank space is exactly the “emptiness” inthe cosmos as understood by Laozi and Zhuangzi. (II, 45)
The representation of cosmos and life in Chinese painting is notably glimpsed through such blankspaces. This discovery is made in contrast to Western oil painting, which starts by “first fillingthe entire canvas with pigments” and then “creating illusions through perspective” (II, 45).
A prominent example of applying classical philosophy to artistic phenomena is already seenin Zhu Guangqian’s “Speechless Beauty” (1924). However, Zhu takes Confucius’ phrase“speechless beauty” as a starting point and discusses examples of artworks that correspond to it.
In other words, Zhu precedes classical philosophical thought and, accordingly, deduces thecharacteristics of artistic works18. In contrast, the “blank expression” that Zong Baihua focuses
on is not directly observable in classical thought. Zong’s interpretation is not based on explicit
words mentioned in classical philosophy texts but rather on the idea that the cosmology ofclassical philosophy aligns with the cosmology behind artistic phenomena. This has opened up
new possibilities for the application of classical philosophy.
Moreover, in the above excerpt, it is important to note that Zong Baihua, in explaining theconcept of blank expression, draws upon various concepts from Laozi, Zhuangzi (“Tao,” “Nature,”“Emptiness”), as well as Confucian concepts (“Heaven”). This is by no means due to a lack ofunderstanding of classical philosophy on Zong’s part. At that time, the research findings ofclassical philosophy, such as Hu Shi’s Outline of Chinese Philosophy History (Vol. I, 1918) andFeng Youlan’s A History of Chinese Philosophy (Vol. I, 1931), had significant impacts, and Zonghimself authored manuscripts related to classical philosophy19 . For example, in A History ofChinese Philosophy, Feng Youlan argued that the Confucian concept of “Heaven” could refer to“the natural heavens, i.e., the operations of nature” or “the moral heavens, i.e., the highest
principle of the cosmos,” 20 which aligns with concepts from Taoism. Taking into consideration18

For more details, refer to my article, “Zhu Guangqian’s ‘Laokoon Theory’: An Examination of theDevelopment of Comparative Studies of Poetry and Painting in Modern China,” in Aesthetics and Art Studies, Issue
38, 2019, Chapter 2, Section 1.
19
Refer to Wang, Qian, “Modern Chinese Philosophy,” in World History of Philosophy, Vol. 8, Tokyo:
Chikuma Shobo, 2020. Concerning Feng Youlan’s A History of Chinese Philosophy, Zong Baihua referenced andesteemed it in his manuscripts on the history of Chinese philosophy and Laozi from 1946 to 1952 (Ⅱ,706). While
there are extant manuscripts of Zong’s thoughts on classical philosophy from around the 1930s, there are two
proposed theories regarding the writing period: 1928 (Ⅰ,648-660) and the mid-1930s.
20
Refer to Feng, Youlan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, Volume I, Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company,
2014, p. 54.

82

YI Dingthese contemporary achievements in the study of classical philosophy, Zong explored thephilosophical basis that would harmonize with artistic phenomena. It is worth noting that theinterests of Hu Shi and Feng Youlan fundamentally lay in political and social reforms21, not in
the realm of art theory. Therefore, Zong’ s approach can be considered distinct, differing fromboth contemporary classical philosophy researchers and aestheticians.
Incidentally, at this stage, Zong considers the blank expression in Chinese painting as“emptiness,” which can be understood as viewing the painted portions on the canvas as “reality.”
As discussed later, a different interpretation emerged in his later years.

3. Mid-1930s to 1940s: Taoist-Centric Art Theory
From 1932, Zong Baihua had been discussing various concepts from Confucianism andTaoism while examining pre-modern art theory and artistic phenomena. However, he reached aturning point in 1944 with the publication of “The Birth of the Aesthetic Realm (State) [意境] in
Chinese Art (Revised Edition)” (hereafter referred to as “Aesthetic Realm”). In this work, hefirmly established Taoist philosophy as the foundation of his art theory. Nevertheless, theinclination towards Taoism was already discernible in the mid-1930s. Let us explore this matterstarting from the 1934 essay, “The Origin and Foundation of Chinese and Western Painting
Techniques” (hereafter denoted as “The Origin of Painting Techniques”).
3.1 The Issue of Rhythm and the Retreat of Confucian Thought
In the 1934 essay “The Origin of Painting Techniques,” there is no significant change in
Zong’s approach of applying classical philosophy. “The vividly depicted objects within thepainting are integrated with ‘blank spaces’ here and there, connecting to an overall flowing,spiritual rhythm. The blank spaces... merge within the inner workings of all [depicted] things,
being the virtual and spiritual ‘Tao’ that participates in the dynamics [=Qi-yun sheng-dong] of
all things” (Ⅱ, 101). Zong continues to naturally link the blank expression in painting, its dynamic
characteristics, and the “Tao.” However, what holds significance in this context is the discernible
stance of Zong towards Confucian thought, evident through the problem he raised concerning“rhythm.”
At the beginning of this discourse, Zong Baihua references Walter Pater’s renowned quote,“all art constantly aspires towards the condition of music” (II, 99)22. Zong places the state ofmusic and rhythm at the core of art expression. He pays attention to the expression of “vivid andabstract” lines found in the patterns of bronze vessels from the Shang and Zhou periods,
considering them as the origin of various Chinese arts representing the movement of cosmic life(“Tao”) (II, 101). According to Zong, the essence of rhythm can be observed in the genre ofcalligraphy. While it may not be difficult to comprehend through the abstract brushwork in

21

Refer to Nakajima, Takahiro, Zhuangzi: Become a Rooster and Announce the Time, Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten,
2009, Chapter 3.
22
Walter Pater’s quote can be traced back to the third edition of The Renaissance published in 1888, in thesection “The School of Giorgione.”

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory

83

calligraphy, the following descriptions require attention:
In China, the teachings of music[楽教] no longer passed down, and poets could no longer
sing to stringed instruments. Therefore, they express the emotions and sentiments of theheart through calligraphy and painting. Especially, calligraphy is an abstract art that
replaces music (II, 101-102).
Similar discourse can be found in another passage:
The formal beauty of ancient feudal ritual music has already perished. In response, thegenius of the [Chinese] people, through the dynamism of brush and ink, … expresses a
free, transcendent rhythm of the heart (II, 100).
When Zong Baihua asserts that the brush and ink in painting and calligraphy are the best forms
for expressing “the emotions and sentiments of the heart = the rhythm of the heart,” he has inmind the collapse of Confucian thought related to “music education” and “ritual music life.”
Confucius advocated the idea of cultivating one’s character through music, extending from theindividual to society, forming a kind of order and norm23. However, this music system had fallen
into disuse during the period when Chinese representative arts, namely calligraphy and painting,flourished. Given this description, it can be inferred that, for Zong, Confucianism during thisperiod ceased to be a central theory capable of explaining Chinese art. While the marginalizationof Confucianism in Zong’s theory of Chinese art can be indirectly discerned here, when combinedwith the emphasis on Taoist thought, as discussed in the next section, his theoretical focus during
this period becomes even clearer.
3.2 The Relationship between “Tao” and Art: Reference to Zhuangzi’s Thought
Zong Baihua’s theory of Chinese art underwent a significant transformation with his 1944
essay, “Aesthetic Realm.” In this discourse, he attempted for the first time to theoretically explain
the applicability of classical philosophy to art. “Zhuangzi is a philosopher possessing artistic
genius, and his interpretation of the highest attainable realm or state of art is the most exquisite.
In his philosophy, the metaphysical principle known as ‘Tao’ fits together seamlessly with ‘art’”(II, 367). Zong came to recognize that there was a gap between the metaphysical philosophicalconcept “Tao” and art, and it was Zhuangzi, instead of Confucius or Laozi, who successfully
bridged that gap.
In this essay, Zong cites several passages from Zhuangzi. Here, we would like to focus on
the parable of “Butcher Ding Carves an Ox.” The skilled cook, the “butcher Ding,” wields his
knife following the natural grain of the ox’s body - a metaphor for the inherent “Tao” -23

As for music education as part of Confucianism, it has already been discussed by Hu, Shi in An Outline of
the History of Chinese Philosophy and Feng, Youlan in A History of Chinese Philosophy. Additionally, Koana,
Akiako provides a concise explanation in her book Why Do People Seek Beauty? An Introduction to Aesthetics as a
Way of Life (Kyoto: Nakanishya Publishing, 2008), pp. 86-87.

84

YI Dingtranscending technique into something greater, the “Tao” beyond technique.
...[As the butcher wields his knife,] there came the sound of slicing flesh and wielding
the knife – it is all pleasingly attuned to the musical tones, in harmony with the “Mulberry
Trees” [a dance], and fitting the rhythm (syllables) of “Jing-shou [経首]” (a chapter ofmusic in King Yao’s time) as well. (II, 368; partial omission from Zong Baihua’s
quotation)24
Via focusing on this parable, Zong Baihua asserted that “the life of the ‘Tao’ enters into the‘technique,’ and the “technique” that “reveals” the “Tao” transforms into “art” (II, 367). Similar
to the Western thought that art evolves from mechanical techniques, there was an understanding
in China that art also develops from technical skills. During the same period as the essay“Aesthetic Realm,” Zong, in his work “Discussing the Emptiness[空霊] and Substantial[充実]Aspects of Literature and Art” (1943, hereafter “Emptiness and Substantial”), declared that “artis a type of technique” (II, 347). The interpretation that distinguishes “art” from “technique”
based on whether it can lead to the “Tao” represents one of the earliest articulations of the modern
sense of the concept of art in China. Furthermore, the possibility of such an interpretation isbelieved to have emerged in connection with rhythm. While the emphasis on rhythm in Chinese
art had been a recurring theme for the past decade, the passage from Zhuangzi in this context
became a clear theoretical foundation for it.
Moreover, this passage, for instance, drew attention as a point of distinction between
technique and art in the works of later scholars, such as Xu Fuguan’s The Spirit of Chinese Art(1966) and Ye Lang’s Outline of the History of Chinese Aesthetics (1985). However, both of themperceived Zhuangzi’s portrayal of musicality as a metaphor for uselessness, understanding thecontrast between usefulness (butchering an ox) and the aesthetic significance of art (suitable formusicality) 25. In contrast, Zong Baihua stated that “the life of the ‘Tao’ and the life of ‘art’
harmonize with the rhythms and cadences of dances in the Mulberry Trees and the Jing-shou.
The essence of these lies in the rhythms of music” (II, 368), taking the meaning of rhythm literally.
In this manner, through this passage from Zhuangzi, Zong discovered an argument withinclassical philosophy itself that justifies the connection from philosophy to art.
As later elucidated by Xu Fuguan in The Spirit of Chinese Art, Laozi and Zhuangzi originally
did not intend to discuss art. However, the “Tao” they presented ultimately came to best represent
the “the highest spirit of art” in China 26 . In this sense, one could argue that Zong Baihua’sinterpretation of Taoist thought at this stage represents a more fundamental resource withinclassical philosophy for discussing art, compared to the superficial interpretations of the terms“art” and “beauty” that are explicitly mentioned in the texts of classical philosophy. This marked
24

Zhuangzi, Chapter Three. The modern Chinese translation is based on Zhuangzi, translated into English by
Wang, Rongpei and into modern Chinese by Qin, Xuqing and Sun, Yongchang, Chapter Three “Essentials for
Keeping a Good Health,” Hunan People’s Publishing House; Foreign Languages Press, 1999, P. 43.
25
Refer to Xu, Fuguan, The Spirit of Chinese Art, Beijing: Jiuzhou Publishing, 2014, pp. 61-62. See also Ye,Lang, An Outline of the History of Chinese Aesthetics, as mentioned in note 2, pp. 20-121.
26
Refer to Xu, Fuguan, The Spirit of Chinese Art, as mentioned in the previous note 25, pp. 58-66.

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory85

a turning point in the formation of modern Chinese aesthetics.
3.3 Revisiting Confucian Ethical Thought
While Zong Baihua emphasized Taoist thought over Confucianism, it should be noted that
he did not entirely dismiss Confucianism. Scholars have argued that Zong integrated Confucian
thought into his aesthetic framework, a perspective supported by his explicit admiration for
Confucian ideas in his 1941 work, “Discussing the Beauty of People in Jin in the Shi-shuo xinyu 世説新語” (hereafter noted as “The Beauty of People in Jin”). However, I contend that evenin this case, Confucianism had not yet been employed to construct his theory of art.
In this discourse, Zong Baihua designates the Wei and Jin periods as the era that most aptly
embodies the spirit of Chinese art. He attributes this to the understanding of Confucian thoughtby the people of the Jin dynasty. According to Zong, the moral thought that Confucius seeks isnone other than “the true nature, the true spirit, the so-called the heart of a newborn [of humanbeings],” and all rituals and systems are “nothing more than their external garments” (II, 282).
However, since the Han dynasty, they have been solely utilized as tools for seeking employment(II, 282). Therefore, “the people of the Wei and Jin dynasties, with their eccentricities, rebelledagainst a society where appearances differed from the reality [i.e., openly advocating
Confucianism while secretly pursuing worldly fame and fortune] … and sought to unearth thetrue meaning of life and morality within their true nature and spirit” (II, 283). In the 1934 essay“The Origin of Painting,” Zong mentioned that the educational system of Confucianism had
already declined during the time when Chinese painting and calligraphy were thriving. However,in this context, he re-evaluates the influence of Confucianism on the moral perspective of artists.
Jin Lang (2016) argues that Zong Baihua’s essay defended the “Jin people” who wereconsidered to have rejected Confucianism, and reinterpreted Confucian moral thought 27 .
However, as also pointed out by Jin Lang, this essay (“The Beauty of People in Jin”) has a broader
context. In the late 1930s, after the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War, many intellectuals,
including Zhu Guangqian, started to re-evaluate cultural traditions like Confucianism due to theirgrowing concerns about societal issues28. Jin Lang does not expand on this argument further, but
in fact, Zong Baihua’s emphasis on the moral values of Confucian thought was also directed
towards social issues in general. A year before this essay was published, Cai Yuanpei, a pioneer
in Chinese aesthetic education, passed away. Coincidentally, a series of essays were published inissues 78 (March 25, 1940), 79 (April 1), 80 (April 8), and 81 (April 15) of Shishi xinbao Xuedeng [時事新報 学灯] (Chongqing edition), where Zong Baihua served as the chief editor.
These essays brought attention to the fact that, ultimately, Cai Yuanpei’s progressive educational
ideals were not fully realized (II, 263-266). These societal and educational concerns were also
reflected in “The Beauty of the Jin People.” Zong praised the moral education in the Jin period
and raised the question of “whether China has similar great educators today” (II, 285).
Moreover, in the “Editor’s Postscript for ‘The Beauty of the Jin People’ and Others,”
published in issue 126 of Shishi xinbao - Xuedeng on April 28, 1941, Zong Baihua stated, “if you
27
28

As mentioned in the previous note 6, p. 46.
As mentioned in the previous note 6, pp. 43-44.

86

YI Ding

want to know how people sought light and beauty from one of China’s dark and chaotic times[the Wei-Jin period], and how they used it to rescue and build their spiritual lives, transform theirstruggles into creations, and cultivate impressive personalities, please read this essay” (II, 288).
Therefore, Zong’s re-evaluation of Confucianism was closely connected not only to educational
issues but also to broader societal problems. In this essay, however, the philosophical school
primarily applied to interpret art is Taoism. Zong Baihua argues that “the aesthetic sensibilities
and art philosophy of the ‘Jin people’ are based on the cosmology of Laozi and Zhuangzi. They
are characterized by simplicity, profundity, and an air of mystery, which set the tone for China’s
aesthetic sensibilities over the next one thousand five hundred years, particularly in thefundamental directions of landscape painting and landscape poetry.” (II, 280) In this context,
Confucianism contributes to the formation of the moral values of artists. Conversely, thecosmological foundation on which art relies can be found in the philosophies of Laozi andZhuangzi. Overall, the Confucian thought discussed in this essay is limited to the realm of moral
values and is not the primary basis for constructing a theory of Chinese art.

4. Late Period - Confucian-Taoist Mutual Complementarity andthe Distinction of Classical Thought in Art Theory
The essay “Preliminary Exploration,” considered Zong Baihua’s magnum opus, wasdeveloped in the early 1960s and published in 1979. In this essay, he explicitly contrasts theconcepts of “truth [真]” (Taoist) and “goodness [善]” (Confucian), as well as “void [虚]” (Taoist)and “substance [実]” (Confucian) in Chinese art, aiming to systematically integrate both Taoist
and Confucian thought and re-define their roles in interpreting Chinese art. This mutual
complementarity between Confucianism and Taoism goes beyond a simple addition ofConfucianism to the earlier Taoist application; rather, it re-positions the roles of Taoism andclassical philosophy in interpreting Chinese art.
The essay “Preliminary Exploration” comprises a general section along with individual
sections covering various art genres, engaging in discussions on “painting,” “music,” and“gardens and architecture.” In the general section, Zong references Taoist and Confucian thought,
while in the latter sections, he draws from the art theories developed since pre-modern times todiscuss each individual art genre. This structural distinction reveals that Zong moved away fromthe position of using classical philosophy to encompass all arts within a single concept or theory.
Instead, he aimed to provide theoretical explanations for each individual art genre. To clarify his
new stance, we will focus on the comparison between Confucianism and Taoism in the following
discussion.
4.1 The Confucian “Truth” in Relation to the Taoist “Goodness”
The dichotomy between “truth” (Taoist) and “goodness” (Confucian) is delineated by Zong
Baihua, asserting that Chinese art strives for two ideals, ornamentation and natural refinement.
According to him, these two ideals align with the relationships of “beauty and goodness” and“beauty and truth,” which pre-Qin philosophers deliberate from their respective positions.
Confucius and Mencius affirm the ornamentation in art, exemplified by bronzes, and support its

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory87

societal and educational role. In contrast, Laozi and Zhuangzi emphasize nature, fundamentally
negating art (artifice) and advocating a return to the simple and inherent true nature (Ⅲ, 454).
Thus, Confucian thought emphasizes the relationship between “beauty and goodness,” while
Taoist thought focuses on the connection between “beauty and true.” The combination ofConfucian and Taoist thought culminates in the demand for a unified concept: “truth-goodnessbeauty” (Ⅲ, 454).
It is worth noting that these discussions on classical philosophy are not specifically applied
to art here.
This [the discourse by pre-Qin philosophers on art] had a profoundly significant impact
on later aesthetic thought. However, in many cases, practice precedes theory, withartisans and artists leading the way before philosophers. [They] first express a new artistic
realm in artistic practice, and theories that encompass these new realms emerge afterward.
(Ⅲ, 451).
Here, “theory” refers to that of the philosophers. The theories of classical philosophy are
considered to encompass artistic practice.
Hence, how does the concept of “truth-goodness-beauty” encompass any artistic practice?
Zong Baihua illustrates this through examples such as bronze artifacts that “predate Confucius
by more than a hundred years.” These artifacts feature intricate and densely patterned designs
while also embodying a fresh and elegant expression, thus encapsulating two types of beauty.
Zong Baihua further references literary critical terms from Zhong Rong’s Poetic Excellence [詩品 ] of the Six Dynasties period, including “Cuo-cai lou-jin [ 錯 采 鏤 金 ]” (emphasizing
ornamentation) and “Chu-shui fu-rong [出水芙蓉]” (describing a naturally refined appearance)(Ⅲ, 450-451). In this context, not only the expression of artistic works but also pre-modern
artistic theories discussing them are considered to precede classical philosophy and are seen as
connected to artistic practice.
From 1932 onwards, Zong directly applied Taoist philosophy when discussing artistic
practice. However, in his later years, he started to distinguish between artistic practice andclassical philosophy, possibly due to a perceived challenge in effectively incorporating Confucian“goodness” into his own theories of artistic practice.
Zong Baihua, in his 1920 “After Seeing Rodin’s Sculptures,” asserted that art ultimately
aims for the harmony of “truth-goodness-beauty” (I, 328). However, from the 1930s onwards,
particularly when he began focusing on the examination of Chinese art (as opposed to art ingeneral), the concept of “goodness” receded, and he primarily discussed “truth.” For example, inthe 1934 essay “The Origin of Painting,” he stated that the ultimate function of art is to leadpeople “from beauty to truth, to the core of the rhythm of life” (II, 99). Nevertheless, he did notdiscard the “truth-goodness-beauty” framework when discussing Chinese art. In his 1943 “TheEmptiness and the Substantial,” he stated that “philosophy seeks truth, ethics and religion seek
goodness. Between these two, ‘beauty’ represents the profound realm of our emotions andaccomplishes the harmony of character” (II, 347). He also explained that art, in realizing “beauty,”
draws nourishment from adjacent disciplines, connecting “truth” and “goodness” (II, 347).

88

YI Ding

However, this discussion remains a general consideration about the relationships between art andvarious academic disciplines, rather than a deep exploration of art theory.
The role of the Confucian “goodness” in Chinese art was clearly discussed in 1962 “Ancient
Chinese Musical Allegories and Musical Thought.” “Confucius does not merely contemplate theformal beauty of music, but rather places more emphasis on the content goodness of music.” (II,431) Here, Zong Baihua examines ancient musical thought. Confucius, who sought the “goodness”
of music, favored “Shao music,” characterized as “not extreme, not too stimulating, and simple”(II,431). In contrast, Zhuangzi emphasized “Xianchi music,” which “aimed to evoke fear, reduce
strength, lead into a state of distraction, and ultimately bring individuals to a state of wanderingin bewilderment [the primitive state of nature] to unify with the Tao” (II, 438). Laozi, on the other
hand, was not interested in music, saying, “[Artificial] five tones make one’s ears deaf” (II, 440).
Thus, in contrast to the “truth” sought by Laozi and Zhuangzi in musical thought, Confucius’attitude of seeking the “goodness” is revealed. This is an argument similar to the Confucian“goodness” as formalized in “Preliminary Exploration.”
In summary, when discussing Chinese art, Zong Baihua sought the “goodness” within
Confucian thought, but he predominantly succeeded at the level of pure artistic philosophy rather
than practical art. In line with this, Taoism also appears to be confined to the metaphysical levelto establish a complementary relationship with Confucianism. In “Preliminary Exploration,” adistinction was drawn between practical art and metaphysical philosophy. This is how Zong’s
scheme of “truth-goodness-beauty” was formulated.
4.2 The Confucian “Truth” in Relation to the Taoist “Goodness”
Regarding Chinese art theory, the stance of distinguishing classical philosophy frompractical art and the impact it has brought is further clarified in the context of the “void” and“substance” problem. “The ‘void’ and ‘substance’ problem pertains to the issue of philosophicalcosmology, … when this cosmology manifests in art, it demands the fusion of the ‘void’ and‘substance’ in art as well.” (Ⅱ,455) Art continues to reflect the cosmology, but their dimensions
are distinguished, and both dimensions are thought to encompass the “void” and “substance.”
The issue of void and substance as a matter of philosophical cosmology is explained as follows.
This can be divided into two schools of thought: one represented by Confucius and
Mencius, and the other by Laozi and Zhuangzi. Laozi and Zhuangzi regard “void” aseven truer compared to “substance,” the cause of all truths, without which nothing cancome into existence, and life’s vitality would cease. On the contrary, Confucianism starts
its discussion from the “substance,” for instance, Confucius emphasizes the qualities ofbeing “balanced in culture and nature [Wen-zhi bin-bin 文質彬彬],” seeking both innerqualities (nature and simplicity) and external expression (refined culture and demeano).
Similarly, Mencius states that “fulfillment is called beauty [充実之謂美].” (Ⅱ,455)
The expression “balanced in culture and nature” signifies an ideal state of a person, prescribing
concrete demands for both the external and internal aspects of a human being. “Fulfillment iscalled beauty” suggests that the enrichment and expansion of specific moral virtues (“goodness”)

The Application of Confucianism and Taoism in Zong Baihua’s Chinese Art Theory89

throughout one’s entire character result in the manifestation of “beauty.” These arguments are
distinctly separate from the discourse on practical art.
In contrast, the dichotomy between “void” and “substance” in art is explicated through ananalysis of the description found in the Kao Gong Ji[考工記], a text presumed to have originatedduring the Pre-Qin Dynasty, detailing the craftsmanship of a carpenter [梓人] as he creates amusical instrument stand[筍虡]. According to Zong Baihua, this carpenter not only creates thestand but also considers the entirety, including the instrument placed on the stand. Consequently,
he carves “ferocious beasts like tigers and leopards” onto the stand of the musical instrument.
This allows people, when listening to the sound of the instrument, to simultaneously see the formsof the ferocious beasts, creating an impression as if the beasts are roaring. “The wooden carvingsof tigers and leopards are rendered more vivid, and at the same time, the sound of the drum isgiven a tangible form, resulting in an intensified impact on the entire artwork (II,454). Zongconcludes that the form created by the artist represents the “substance,” while what stimulates
our imagination is the “void” (II,454). To elaborate, the wooden carvings of the visuallyconfirmable beasts embody the “substance,” whereas the imagined beasts constitute the “void.”
In continuation of this interpretation, Zong Baihua states the following."
The thought of combining “void” and “substance” as expressed in the Kao Gong Ji is a.
distinctive feature of Chinese art. Chinese painting places significant emphasis on theutilization of empty space. For example, [the painter from the Southern Song Dynasty]
Ma Yuan … consistently painted only a portion of the canvas. The remaining empty
spaces are not filled in, yet they become the sea, the sky, and one cannot perceive themas “empty.” (Ⅱ, 454)
The emphasis on expressing emptiness in Chinese painting has remained consistent sinceZong Baihua’s early discourse. However, considering the interpretation of the Kao Gong Ji, here,
the imagined sea and sky are regarded as the “void,” while, in contrast, the empty spaces on thecanvas are perceived as objectively existing “substance.” This interpretation diverges from theearlier discussion, employing Taoist “void” philosophy to interpret the emptiness in Chinese
painting, a perspective that posits “emptiness = void.” This discrepancy in interpretation
fundamentally arises from the shift in Zong Baihua’s argumentative framework.
Above, we have clarified a new approach to reference classical philosophy in the context of
the “Preliminary Exploration.” It is important to note that classical philosophy, ultimately
positioned as a metaphysical cosmic view, underscores its association with art without providing
a direct explanation of art. At the beginning of the “Preliminary Exploration,” Zong Baihua
articulates a specific methodology for studying Chinese aesthetics:
In the historical context of China, not only do the writings of philosophers encompass
aesthetic thoughts, but also the theoretical works on poetry, painting, drama, and music
left by renowned poets, painters, and playwrights throughout history are replete withaesthetic ideas. Consequently, the exploration of Chinese aesthetic history is endowedwith abundant source materials, rendering the areas of interest notably diverse. (Ⅱ, 447)

90

YI DingPre-modern art theory, along with classical philosophy, constitutes the content of Chinese
aesthetics. Moreover, Zong Baihua points out the drawbacks of ignoring artistic practice, statingthat “if we were to limit our understanding to texts alone, we would often fail to grasp the concreteand profound aspects of the aesthetic ideas of ancient philosophers.” He emphasizes theimportance of “deepening our understanding of literary sources”, while simultaneously
referencing “vivid ancient artistic representations” revealed by the gradually developing field ofarchaeology in China at that time and “ancient literary materials” (Ⅱ, 448-449). Zong Baihua’s
theoretical framework for elucidating Chinese art thus establishes the interplay between classicalphilosophy and artistic practice.

Conclusion
In his early works on Chinese aesthetics, Zong Baihua defined the ideal “aesthetics” as adiscipline that considers distinct art phenomena within specific cultures while reflecting thecosmic views pursued by those cultures. In these early writings, he primarily drew upon
Confucian and Taoist concepts, employing pre-modern art theory (Qi-yun sheng-dong) andartistic phenomena (blank space) to expound his ideas. However, in the 1960s, Zong re-evaluatedthe role of classical philosophy in aesthetics. Rather than directly applying Taoist and Confucian
philosophical theories to artistic phenomena, he turned to ancient art theories, constructing asystem that mutually complemented Confucianism and Taoism as a reflection of the cosmic view
underpinning Chinese art phenomena.
In contemporary Chinese aesthetics, the application of classical philosophy to artistic
phenomena is attributed to Zong Baihua’s pioneering efforts. However, it is essential to recognizethat Zong did not ultimately adopt this approach himself. A more accurate assessment would beto acknowledge his contributions in initially experimenting with this framework. In his later years,
he emphasized the collaboration of classical philosophical theory and pre-modern art theory. In
his later years, he emphasized the integration of classical philosophical theory and pre-modern
art theory. Subsequent developments in Chinese aesthetics have delved into a more intricate
analysis of how classical philosophical concepts are received by pre-modern art theory andfurther employed in interpreting artistic phenomena. This has led to a distinct development in
Chinese aesthetics that differs from Western aesthetics. It was Zong Baihua’s ideas that served
as the starting point for this development.
While some may argue that Zong’s contributions are inclined toward the examination of
traditional Chinese aesthetics compared to Zhu Guangqian’s focus on Western aesthetics, it
should be noted that, as discussed in this essay, Zong drew many insights from Western thought(O. Spengler, M. Dessoir, and W. Pater) in constructing Chinese aesthetics. Drawing from theframework of Zong Baihua’s Chinese art theory outlined in this paper, it is anticipated that
subsequent, more nuanced research will delve into his aesthetic thought.
Acknowledgment
This research was supported by a JSPS Fellowship (20J14297).