guqin

Non-Chinese connoisseurs have long savored Chinese achievements in literature, the visual arts, and speculative thought. For complex reasons, there is no comparable recognition of Chinese achievements in music. History is largely to blame for this, as the social, political, and ideological tumult of the past two centuries has forced change after change on China at a dizzying rate, and much of traditional culture has been swallowed up, forgotten, or misunderstood in the process. Today there are many top-grade musicians who play something called “Chinese music” or “national/ethnic music”, but many fail to realize just how modern and how Westernized a music this is.

Turn back the clock a hundred years, and the musical landscape of China appears vastly different. The conservatory system and the sea of professional performing ensembles—the backbone of contemporary Chinese music practice—are largely absent. Instruments use unequal temperament, have quiet silk strings (as opposed to the metal strings that dominate today), and play heterophonic rather than harmonized ensemble music; there are no conductors, no professors, no orchestras modeled on Western precedent, and no high-class Chinese intelligentsia appreciating “Chinese music” in concert halls. In the concert halls (that is, in colonial concessions) there is Western classical music; indigenous Chinese music exists mainly at the folk or popular level, and in the studies of the literati. It is to this folk music and to literati music that we must look for indigenous Chinese sources and structures of musical expression. It is also this folk and literati music that was found wanting by decades of music reformers enamored of Western musical achievements.

Of the two, Chinese folk and popular music is marvelous, varied, and interesting, and has made a strong contribution to the contemporary “Chinese music” synthesis. Indeed, “Chinese music” today can be seen largely as Chinese folklore on Western steroids, and it has propelled the careers of generations of professional musicians. Today when people hear and learn about something called “Chinese classical music”, it is usually the folkoric/Western synthesis that gets the most airtime and attention. Despite the strength and interest of this system, the specialist in Western classical music, or in Carnatic music, or in Ottoman music, or in any of the world’s other classical traditions will probably find something wanting in the result. Strip away the Western contributions (which themselves are not always well-digested), and most “Chinese music” seems unsystematic, unsubtle, and formally crude—bearing no comparison with the vast powers of the symphony, the intricate architecture of the
ragam-tanam-pallavi, or the gripping exploration of taksim. There is some delicate expression in this music, as in folk music everywhere, but its range is rather muted, and little attention is given to the abstract or the exploratory. The guiding ideologies of much 20th-century Chinese music have not helped in this regard: romanticism, populism, and socialism have tended to encourage sentimentality at the expense of abstraction. And when abstraction has been sought, it is to the West that composers and performers have turned.

Few professional musicians in China today have been guided by the
indigenous classical tradition of China, which is very real and very alive, but relatively marginalized and seldom listened to. Chinese elite culture has been among the world’s most sophisticated for thousands of years, and it would be odd if there were no musical legacy to match its well-known achievements in other areas. Indeed, from earliest times Chinese philosophers and writers have been deeply interested in music and its effects on the human psyche and on nature itself; they have left enormous volumes of theoretical and practical reflections on music as well as accounts of musical life both inside and outside their immediate social context. Archaeological excavations have demonstrated that the technology of musical instrument production was extremely advanced by the mid-1st millennium BCE, as was state investment in orchestras and other music professionals. In addition to ritual and entertainment music for elite audiences, there existed a strong tradition of using music for self-cultivation and refinement of character. Chinese writers of all periods are grandiose in their praise of music and lavish in their descriptions of its possibilities for effecting social order and shaping individual personality. Where then did all “this music” go? It certainly seems a far cry from the opera and folk instrumental traditions that now constitute most people’s vision of Chinese music.

While elite music had a strong public character through the 1st millennium CE, the “court” tradition of performance gradually weakened, until it barely existed apart from folk music by the 19th century. The use of orchestras declined, some instrument technologies were lost, and the old mammoth compositional forms gradually disappeared. If indigenous Chinese classical music had kept a more public face, and a more vital performing tradition, it might have better withstood the winds of Westernization. (Witness the contrast with India here.) But by the 19th century, the continuing traditions of musical classicism had long been the near-exclusive domain of the literati class. While attitudes varied among the literati, there was little emphasis on “outreach” or even public performance of any kind. This tradition emphasized solo over ensemble work, and musical depth over communication—typically one was expected to perform only for a few worthy friends or acquaintances. Playing was mainly for self-cultivation, meditation, and solitary exploration. This profoundly private tradition nurtured phenomenally sophisticated theory, composition, and playing techniques, but it has been overwhelmingly distant from most Chinese people’s musical lives. As such, the living tradition of Chinese classical music is a kind of “hidden treasure” that is not easily found unless one knows where to look.

While Chinese classical aesthetics can be expressed in any musical idiom (vocal, instrumental, ensemble, etc.), the literati have long prized the
guqin above all other instruments, and the guqin is held to express classicism with unique focus, refinement, and scope. Literati music is also commonly rendered on the end-blown flute xiao, on the bridged zither guzheng, on the lute pipa, and in certain vocal contexts; one could conceivably do literati music on an electric guitar or bagpipes. But thus far the guqin has always retained pride of place, partly for historical and partly for musical reasons. The rest of this website will focus exclusively on guqin music, but guqin music can be taken as normative for Chinese classical music—even moreso than vocal music is normative for Indian classical music.