Abstract
As early as the Wei and Jin dynasties, Chinese literary culture developed a marked adulation of genius. Yet, poetry education took a distinct approach, which favored models not solely based on genius. In discussions contrasting Li Bai and Du Fu, Li Bai was esteemed for his rare natural gift, while Du Fu was valued for his profound intellectual insight. Similarly, in the Su-Huang debates, Su Shi was praised for innate talent, while Huang Tingjian was noted for his disciplined scholarship. Despite these distinctions, poetry education consistently recommended emulating figures like Du Fu and Huang Tingjian. This choice reflects the ancient Chinese principle of “education for the average,” rooted in the view that while the wise are innately gifted and the unintelligent fixed in capacity, the “average person's” nature is adaptable. Confucian reflections on human nature placed emphasis on educating the average rather than the exceptionally wise, which adopted a strategy of gradual progress from simplicity to sophistication. As a methodological principle with enduring influence, the concept of “education for the average” became integral to literary theory and criticism, leading to distinct positions on aesthetic values and approaches to emulating genius. This pragmatic celestial-human strategy enriched ancient ideas on literary talent and shaped the expression of literary criticism in China, which highlighted the balance of celestial-human harmony alongside the importance of human endeavor and norms.
Keywords
genius, poetry education, education for the average, the distinction between Li Bai and Du Fu, the distinction between Su Shi and Huang Tingjian
First Page
101
Last Page
110
Recommended Citation
Zhao, Shugong. 2025. "Education for the Average Person and the Celestial-Human Strategy in Ancient Poetry Education: Pedagogical Choices in the Context of the Li-Du and Su-Huang Debates." Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art 44, (6): pp.101-110. https://tsla.researchcommons.org/journal/vol44/iss6/11
Included in
Aesthetics Commons, American Studies Commons, Chinese Studies Commons, Classics Commons, Comparative Literature Commons, Film and Media Studies Commons, Modern Literature Commons, Theatre and Performance Studies Commons
