生平

萬曆三十五年（1608年）生。金聖歎童年貧困孤獨，九歲入讀私塾，刻苦勤奮，但思想獨立，不像其他科場士子只讀《四書五經》，他閱讀各書，尤其沈迷於《水滸傳》，成年後補弟子員（考取秀才），卻揮霍無度，以致常處貧困。金聖歎篤信神佛，喜讀佛經和結交僧人，擅長扶乩降靈，自稱為佛教天台宗祖師智顗弟子的轉世化身，託名「泐庵」法師，士大夫尊稱為「泐公」或「泐師」，20歲起開始在吳縣扶乩，自稱收納30多個已逝女子為冥間弟子，1635－1637年間最活躍，曾到葉紹袁、錢謙益、姚希孟、戴汝義等士大夫家中扶乩，寫出優美感人的篇章，往往說中事主的心思，受葉紹袁等人的崇信；錢謙益直言金聖歎好像受某種神靈支配。其後他絕意仕宦，埋首書本，約在1641年評點小說《水滸傳》，1656年刊行評點王實甫《西廂記》，此外編輯唐詩選集《唐才子書》8卷，編寫八股文應試範本《制義才子書》，並注釋杜甫詩集。他亦開堂招生講學，旁徵博引，炫耀才學，頗受當地士庶讚賞。順治十七年（1660年）春正月，有友人自京師歸來，轉告金聖歎，稱順治帝讀其所批註的才子書，曾「諭詞臣，此是古文高手，莫以時文眼看他等語」。聖嘆為此「感而淚下，因北向叩首」，題《春感》八首。

1661年，吳縣新任縣令任維初為追收欠稅，鞭打百姓，虧空常平倉的漕糧，激起蘇州士人憤怒。3月初，金聖歎與百餘名文士到孔廟聚集，悼念順治帝駕崩，借機發洩積憤，到衙門給江蘇巡撫朱國治上呈狀紙，控訴任維初，要求罷其職。朱國治下令逮捕其中11人，並為任維初遮瞞迴護，上報京城諸生倡亂抗稅，並驚動先帝之靈。清朝有意威懾江南士族，再逮捕金聖歎等7名文士，在江寧會審，嚴刑拷問，以叛逆罪判處斬首，於8月7日行刑，是為哭廟案。臨死前金聖歎看見家人，神色自若的說：「蓮子心中苦，梨兒腹內酸。」（「蓮」與「憐」，「梨」與「離」同音）。他的家人聽了忍不住大哭，圍觀者亦為之潸然淚下。死後由弟子沈永啟收其遺骸。金聖歎財產充公，家屬發配東北。金聖歎僅向巡撫示威，並無意造反，卻遭貪官陷害，在獄中念念不忘才子書評點尚未完成，辜負生平志業，難以釋懷，悔恨交加。身後，族兄金昌收集編輯其著作與遺稿，題為《唱經堂才子書匯稿》出版，兒子金雍則編集他對唐詩的評解，題《唐才子詩甲集》出版。

思想

金聖歎為人孤高，好率性而為，以才子自居，狂放不羈，譏笑其他秀才庸俗愚拙。他自幼學佛，勸人向善，傾向佛道二家的自由放任，又有儒家的入世衝動。他深感人生只是大夢一場，全然虛幻，短暫易逝，充滿煩惱失意，一切都不可恃，嚮往閑適平和的田園生活。他把男女之情與其他人情區分開來，強調其中必然含有色慾，出於自然，聖人禮制亦不廢情慾。他亦不失儒生身份，期待有用於世，敬佩杜甫的忠君愛國，特別認同孔子弟子曾點。曾點以無意仕宦與嚮往自由而著名，為孔聖人所讚歎，金聖歎特此取字為「聖歎」。政治思想上他傾向保守，批評明末官府苛政，同情被欺壓的百姓，甚至主張官逼民反，但認為王命和禮法終不可違，對盜匪大肆譴責，特別討厭梁山泊首領宋江。

文學

金聖歎最大貢獻在於文學批評。明代李贄曾把司馬遷《史記》、杜甫詩集、蘇軾集、《李獻吉集》和《水滸傳》，定為天下間五大奇書。受李贄影響，金聖歎把《莊子》、屈原《離騷》、《史記》、杜甫詩集、《水滸傳》、《西廂記》合稱「六才子書」，有意把「六才子書」與儒家六經相對應，把《離騷》比作《易經》，把《水滸傳》比作《春秋》，把《西廂記》比作《詩經》。他亦非常欣賞《左傳》，常把《左傳》與《史記》相提並論，卻不甚欣賞《三國演義》及《西遊記》兩部小說。金聖歎認為文章最高典範是「精嚴」，深思熟慮，無多餘的一字一句。這可能受八股文影響，八股文正講求結構嚴密，文筆精練，毫無贅詞。不論什麼體裁，他都重視作品的起承轉合，認為文學應表現人內心的真感情，而不應受古人創作模式束縛，主張實寫不如虛寫曲寫，提倡「烘雲托月」的襯托技巧，讀書時，必須思索作品的寫作手法，才能欣賞其真精神。

金聖歎吸收了明代士人評點古文、史書，尤其是八股文的手法。除了《水滸傳》、《西廂記》和唐詩，他也評點過八股文。明代古文與小說戲曲的評點，大多只是在文章妙處打圈點，提醒讀者注意，加上簡單批語。金聖歎擴充舊有評點之法，綿密有如經書注釋，並勇於改動原文，以「奇」、「妙」等評語自我喝彩，甚至自誇點評無與倫比。他期待讀者透過其評點，學會如何閱讀其他文學作品。他自視為權威，了解甚至超越原作者的思想世界，文學評點的目的不是去尋覓古人意思，而是為了與後人交往，對作品的解讀，無須與作者原意相同。

《水滸傳》

金聖歎約在1641年評點《水滸傳》，作序三篇解釋評點理由，評價作者施耐庵的文學成就，並寫《讀第五才子書法》，評論小說整體的優點；每回開首有一段「序評」，段落和句子之間則有夾批。他讚賞《水滸傳》比《史記》更優勝，因《史記》拘於史實，《水滸傳》虛構故事，則可隨心所欲，表示「天下之文章，無有出《水滸》右者；天下之格物君子，無有出施耐庵先生右者。」、「不讀《水滸》，不知天下之奇！」。他特別讚賞小說人物栩栩如生，對話生動逼真，高度個性化，作者可說對世事無所不知。金聖歎對《水滸傳》又愛又恨，他同情小說中的綠林好漢，但又批評他們的無法無天，特別欣賞李逵和武松二人，卻嚴詞譴責宋江。金聖歎本《水滸傳》又稱貫華堂本，有正傳70回及楔子1回，偽造施耐庵序一篇，自稱得到70回本古本，止於宋江受招安，盧俊義夢見梁山好漢被張叔夜所縛。金聖歎批評羅貫中續寫招安以後的情節，他眼見明末流寇橫行，痛恨強盜，反對招降流賊。原本《水滸傳》中梁山好漢接受招安，編入官軍，金聖歎認為這情節美化了強盜，慫恿造反，故腰斬小說，刪去舊本71回後半部至結尾羅貫中狗尾續貂的文字，並編造盧俊義夢中群盜全部被處斬的結局。他又將原書的「引首」和第一回合為一章，題為楔子，舊本第2回成為金本第1回，舊本第3回成為金本第2回，餘此類推。金聖歎在《水滸傳》的評點中，將它同《三國演義》、《西遊記》等小說作品屢加比較，闡發《水滸傳》異於《三國演義》、《西遊記》的「才子書」的特質：「《三國》人物事本說話太多了，筆下拖不動，踅不轉，分明如官府傳話奴才，只是把小人聲口替得這句出來，其實何曾自敢添減一字。《西遊》又太無腳地了，只是逐段捏捏撮撮，譬如大年夜放煙火，一陣一陣過，中間全沒貫串，便使人讀之，處處可住。」，認為《三國演義》中有大段的文字都是羅貫中直接照抄《三國志》、《三國志平話》等史書以及話本；《西遊記》的作者吳承恩想像力豐富，但是故事情節不連貫，不像是一部長篇小說；《水滸傳》的故事是連貫的，故事套故事是一氣貫通到底的。

內容上，金本與舊本頭71回分別甚微，但刪去許多詩歌，以致文氣稍欠順暢。從文學角度看，胡適贊同金聖歎腰斬《水滸傳》，因為70回以後的內容敷衍雜湊，確是敗筆。但文學史家亦認為，金聖歎腰斬小說的做法，破壞了小說的基本構思和悲劇意念。金本改變了舊本說書人鬆散雜沓的敘事方式，較原書更前後一致，簡潔緊湊而生動。他修改原書前後矛盾之處，如在第22回把武松上景陽崗前所飲的「十五碗」酒改為「十八碗」。他刪除舊本中的許多詩詞，這類詩詞多用於寫人寫景，陳規老套，往往無助於情節發展，金聖歎的刪除情有可原。他也刪除一些冗長累贅、無助於情節發展的文字，如在第25回刪去一節潘金蓮與西門慶偷情的敘述。金聖歎也會潤色文句，有時只是改換一兩個字，有時改寫對話，使之更生動有趣，富有戲劇性，偶有佳處，如第5回魯智深質問瓦官寺和尚一節。金聖歎偶爾也會改動情節，使故事更生動有趣，如在63回寫漂亮女將扈三娘擒獲醜郡馬宣贊，取代舊本的秦明，形成美醜對比，妙趣橫生。

金聖歎的批語富有洞察力與啟發性，與原著有相得益彰的效果，但往往著重細節而忽略大體，見木不見林，對小說傾向過譽，忽視小說的缺點。他分析小說有15種寫作技巧：

《西廂記》

金聖歎繼承李贄以王實甫《西廂記》為「古今至文」的說法，盛讚《西廂記》是「天地妙文」，戲曲中有張生與崔鶯鶯幽合的情節，被道學家視為有傷風化的淫書，金聖歎譴責此說，認為男女交合可以描寫，只要作者的意圖不在於「性」，正如《詩經》亦描述男女之情；有問題的，是那些批評《西廂記》為淫書的人自己心存邪念。男女之情出於自然，無日無之，無處不在，以此為題，不能說是淫書。他認為王實甫《西廂記》原本只有4本16折，第5本的4折是他人續作，全劇應結束於第4本第4折，第5本不但質量遠比前4本低，情節上也是畫蛇添足。前4本的所有描寫，已指向崔鶯鶯和張生終成眷屬，根本不必實寫二人成婚。他讚揚《西廂記》言簡意賅，能以寥寥數語揭示人物複雜的心理狀態，善用「烘雲托月」虛寫曲寫的手法，不必直接實寫。雖然劇中崔鶯鶯所唱曲詞比張生、紅娘都少，金聖歎卻認為她才是劇中中心人物，讚賞她的知書識禮。

金聖歎評點《西廂記》的方式與《水滸傳》相似，先以兩篇序說明其意圖，接著是81條「讀《西廂記》法」，劇中每一折前都有一組總論，綜論該折的主題和優點，每一折又分許多小節，每節後都有一段短文，解釋該節的內容；字句間亦有許多批語。雖然他認為第5本是續作，仍寫下詳細批點，但對原文多加批評。他借用分析詩歌的「分解」手法，把每一折分成幾個小節，手法巧妙。《西廂記》評點風格較《水滸傳》從容平靜，含蓄收斂，更為輕鬆，多了禪理議論，少了憤世嫉俗的言論。金聖歎對《西廂》讀法，極為重視「夢」與「覺」的關係，以及心理描寫的深度，評語有啟發性，有時牽引佛家說法，亦有文不對題，過於穿鑿附會，流於外行。例如《西廂記》頭一本4折主要描寫張生，崔鶯鶯僅偶然亮相，這是因為根據元雜劇慣例，一本4折的主角都應是同一角色；金聖歎卻附會說這是「烘雲托月」的襯托手法，故意不正面寫崔鶯鶯；他對第5本批評嚴厲亦有欠公允。

金聖歎多處修改《西廂記》原文，使張生和崔鶯鶯的言談舉止，更合乎其出身背景，例如他刪去第1折末張生向法聰借廂房的請求，使第二折張生的話顯得沒頭沒腦，突出他焦慮不安的心態。他也刪去崔鶯鶯一些過於直率熱情的描寫，使其形象更嫻靜優雅，對張生漸生好感而非一見鍾情。他往往縮簡或刪除原著的襯字，曲詞則改動甚微，偶爾擅加修改，以致違反韻律。純粹從文學角度來看，金本比舊本優勝，簡潔精練，但他卻忽略了戲曲演唱和表演方面的技巧，格律上有欠妥當，劇作家李漁批評他於戲曲是外行，不明白戲曲的特質。金聖歎亦改動劇幕，舊本中有4個楔子，分別置於第1、3、4、5本的第一折之前，金本則把它們雜入緊接其後的各折中；金聖歎又把舊本第二本的前兩折併合為一，使5折變為4折。

詩歌

金聖歎所撰詩歌300多首，身後收入《沉吟樓詩選》，並撰成《杜詩解》4卷，評解180首杜甫詩歌，但並未完成全部杜詩評點。此外，他也評解了古詩十九首及595首唐代七律。他主張詩歌必須注重自發的真感情，好詩能傳達詩人所思所感，甚至嬰兒哭聲，都可以看成詩；真摯感情，足以使任何人成為詩人，見解與李贄相似。作者必須抓住突發的靈感，也不能忽視表現技巧，好書都源自作者的長年構思和認真寫作，冥思苦想後才能揮灑自如，渾然天成。他也沒有忽略讀者，認為好詩應溫柔敦厚，奉行中庸之道，可說是古典浪漫主義者。傳統詩學，以4句為一「解」，律詩8句，一般分為兩解。金聖歎提出新說，4句稱一解之外，以2句為「半解」；詩歌意思的起落，往往亦相當於解的起落。例如古詩十九首〈青青河畔草〉：「青青河畔草，鬱鬱園中柳。盈盈樓上女，皎皎當窗牖。娥娥紅粉粧，纖纖出素手。」頭兩句專寫景，是為「半解」；第3-6句，寫的是美人，則是另一「解」。

金聖歎讚賞杜詩寫景敘事生動逼真，寫景栩栩如生，能寫出令人難忘的境界，用字巧妙而富於暗示性，細致入微，迂迴曲寫，用字簡潔，言簡意賅，如〈宿昔〉「花驕迎雜樹，龍喜出平池」，寫出唐明皇對楊貴妃的迷戀。他亦尊敬杜甫人格，杜詩的偉大，正因為杜甫是個偉大的人。金聖歎評解杜詩，每首詩前先有簡要解題，總體評論該詩。除了短小的絕句外，詩歌都分為若干節（解），律詩一律分為兩節，每節4行，長詩分節則多少不一，如〈北征〉分為35節；每一詩節後都附有評解。其評點發人深省，著重一字一詞細微差別，如〈秋興〉其一「玉露凋傷楓樹林，巫山巫峽氣蕭森」，他除了指出此兩句的淒涼氣氛外，更指出第一句紅白兩色的強烈對比；又如〈秋興〉其四「聞道長安似奕棋」，「聞道」二字，顯示杜甫不忍心直寫長安的動蕩，也不敢相信其事，抒寫了內心的悲哀和震驚。文學史家指出他的批語「生動真切，頗能得其情致」，富有創意，如在〈秋興〉其一「叢菊兩開他日淚」，把「開」解釋為及物動詞「開出」，更富詩意。但金聖歎有時刻意求新，求深反惑，作出莫須有的牽強解釋，如認為〈春日懷李白〉「飄然思不群」一句，是對李白詩篇的微言。

影響

中國文學

金聖歎的評本大受歡迎，流傳日廣，身後書商以他的名義出版別的著作，都題為「才子書」。金本《水滸傳》和《西廂記》長期以來都是二書最流行的版本，金本《水滸傳》甚至取代所有舊本，三百年來，人們根本不知道金本之前《水滸傳》尚有其他版本，金本《水滸傳》文字精練，結構緊湊，人物性格更有個性，更為適合閱讀，被視為最有文學價值的版本。金聖歎的評點，亦對後人產生巨大影響，成為倣效模範。中國的小說批評，以李贄開其端，由金聖歎發揚和推廣，小說評點的方式一直延續至20世紀初。毛聲山評點《琵琶記》，稱為《第七才子書琵琶記》，其子毛宗崗則借金聖歎之名偽撰序文讚揚《三國演義》，稱之為「第一才子書」。脂硯齋批點《紅樓夢》，亦模倣金聖歎，認為他最擅長發掘小說的優點。脂批列舉的一些寫作技巧，如「烘雲托月」、「橫雲斷嶺」、「草蛇灰線」等法，都直接源自金批。金聖歎首創以禪理評點戲曲，戲曲方面，金聖歎「欲不害情」的觀點，與李漁看法相似，有助釐清愛情劇的本質，使清初以後的才子佳人劇描寫人物更鮮活真實。詩評方面，金聖歎密友徐增《說唐詩》受其強烈影響，承繼他的詩歌「分解」說，並以作品的起承轉合為評價標準。

金聖歎的乩語亦影響清代士人，其降乩使錢謙益以為，自己是東晉高僧東林慧遠轉世；他在葉紹袁家扶乩時，託稱其亡女葉小鸞來降，寫出許多感人篇章，成為士人一時佳話。曹雪芹《紅樓夢》中林黛玉的形象，有取於葉小鸞；金聖歎虛構「無葉堂」，為聰穎靈慧的早逝女子聚會之處，則可能啟發創作大觀園的靈感。

域外

18世紀中，金本《水滸傳》與《西廂記》傳入朝鮮，流傳甚廣，俞晚柱、等許多士人都甚為喜愛金本《水滸傳》。朝鮮原本沒有小說評論傳統，19世紀時，石泉主人、樸泰錫、水山先生等作家受金聖歎啟發，借鑑金聖歎評點的體例、手法與觀點，分別創作了《折花奇談》、《漢唐遺事》、《春香傳》等漢文評點小說，標志朝鮮古典小說批評的真正形成。金本《水滸傳》和《西廂記》亦輸往日本，、、清田儋叟等儒者都喜愛其《水滸傳》，梁田蛻岩想效法金聖歎評點《阿國傳》，其弟子清田儋叟著有《水滸傳批評解》，既模倣金聖歎，又想加以超越，在批語中多次反駁金聖歎。金聖歎亦影響了江戶作家，瀧澤馬琴對金聖歎的評論有所反駁，同時又受金聖歎影響，創作《賴豪阿音梨鼠》，模倣金本《水滸傳》以楔子起首的手法，自作評點語句亦模徬金批。

地位

金聖歎是中國白話文學研究的開拓者，提高通俗文學的價值，卓有遠見，被視為中國白話文運動的先驅。前人稱讚白話文學大多泛泛而論，他卻以細致深入的評點，証明這些作品如何優秀，能與經典名作相提並論，白話文學自此在士人間更為流行。金聖歎的最大貢獻，在於最早提高小說與戲曲的應有地位，是最早和最有影響力的通俗文學提倡者，並開創了細讀文本的文學批評方法，成為中國史上最有創意的文學批評家之一，在小說批評的領域更是首屈一指。金聖歎受徐增、廖燕等同時代士人的讚美，徐增稱讚他博學多才，見識超卓；1659年，順治帝亦稱讚他是古文高手，叫大臣不要用八股文的眼光衡量他。亦有士人批評他提倡《水滸傳》和《西廂記》，惑亂人心。20世紀新文學運動中，文學史家都讚揚金聖歎，胡適認為他是「大怪傑」，有眼光有膽色，林語堂稱他是「十七世紀偉大的印象主義批評家」。但因為他攻擊《水滸傳》中的梁山好漢，一度被中國大陸學者批評為反動和「封建舊社會統治階級代言人」。金聖歎在哭廟案中服刑，又被清末革命黨尊為抗清先烈。

金聖歎所寫評點之詳盡細致，為中國文學批評史上前所未有。在小說批評領域，他的權威地位超越王世貞、李贄和鍾惺諸大家，繼後的毛宗崗評《三國演義》與張竹坡評《金瓶梅》，亦屈居其下。李漁讚賞獨有金聖歎能指出《西廂記》優勝之處，深入至一字一句；清人如馮鎮巒、毛慶臻都讚賞金聖歎《水滸傳》評語匠心獨運，周作人說「小說的批第一自然要算金聖歎」。金聖歎評語具原創性，個性分明，趣味盎然，而且準確清晰，細致入微，著眼於個別字詞的藝術功能，遠勝於中國其他詩話的含糊籠統。金聖歎強調細讀文本，與20世紀西方文學批評中的新批評流派有相通之處，西方學者因其評點與西方文論可以互相發明，特別加以關注。金聖歎指《西廂記》第5本並非王實甫原作，乃後人續寫，成為權威觀點，清代毛聲山等人都同意其說。亦有同時代人如董含批評他的評點雜亂無章，胡適則批評其《水滸傳》評語用了評八股文眼光，也批評他對宋江詆毀過於主觀，無中生有，現代讀者已毋須再看其批語。金聖歎對杜詩的評解，詩學上則無重要地位，重要性則遠不如他對《水滸傳》和《西廂記》的評點，仇兆鰲《杜詩詳注》最為權威，收羅完備，但並未提及金聖歎。

參看

• 哭廟案

• 《水滸傳》

• 《西廂記》

• 《推背圖》

註釋

Biography

The year of Jin's birth is unclear, with some sources reporting 1610 and others 1608. The former estimate is based on the fact that Jin's son was 10 years old in East Asian age reckoning in 1641, and is generally accepted by scholars. He was born Jin Renrui in the town of Suzhou, a place celebrated for its culture and elegance. Jin's family was of the scholar-gentry class, but was constantly plagued by sickness and death, which led in turn to little wealth. Jin's father was apparently a scholar. Jin began schooling relatively late, attending a village school at the age of nine. He displayed great intellectual curiosity, and had somewhat unusual ideas. However, he was a conscientious student. Early in life, he took the style name "Shengtan", a phrase from the Analects meaning "the sage Confucius sighed". He passed only the lowest of the imperial examinations, and never held public office.

In his writings, Jin showed a great interest in the ideas of Chan Buddhism. He claimed that this interest began early, when he first read the Lotus Sutra at the age of 11. This inclination toward Buddhist ideas became even more pronounced after the fall of the Ming Dynasty in 1644. In that year and the one that followed, Jin became conspicuously more depressed and withdrawn, as well as more receptive to Buddhism. The 20th century scholar Zhang Guoguang attributed this change to the fall of the short-lived Li Zicheng regime. Throughout his life, Jin's interest in Buddhism affected his views, and he considered himself a mere agent of the forces of eternity.

Jin is sometimes said to have been known by the name Zhang Cai, but this appears to be a mistake due to confusion with a contemporary, Zhang Pu.

Death

In 1661, Jin joined a number of literati in protesting the appointment of a corrupt official. The protesters first petitioned the government, and then staged a public rally. This was met with swift retaliation from local officials, and Jin was sentenced to death. This incident is sometimes called "Lamenting at the Temple of Confucius" (哭廟案), and led to a stifling of political dissent for years after. Before his death, Jin supposedly joked, "Being beheaded is the most painful thing, but for some reason it's going to happen to me. Fancy that!" In a 1933 essay, noted writer Lu Xun admits that this quote may be apocryphal, but condemns it as "laughing away the cruelty of the human butcher".

Literary theory and criticism

He was known for listing what he called the "Six Works of Genius" (六才子書): Zhuangzi, Li Sao, Shiji, Du Fu's poems, Romance of the Western Chamber (Xi Xiang Ji) and Water Margin (Shuihu Zhuan). This list contained both highly classical works, like Li Sao and Du Fu's poems, and novels or plays in vernacular Chinese that had their origins in the streets and marketplace. The six works were chosen based on their literary merit, as opposed to their upstanding morals. For these reasons, Jin was considered an eccentric and made many enemies among the conservative Confucian scholars of his day. Jin edited, commented on, and added introductions and interlinear notes to the popular novels Water Margin and Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and the Yuan dynasty drama, Romance of the Western Chamber.

Jin is often grouped with Mao Zonggang, and Zhang Zhupo as commentator/editors. Mao's commentarial edition of Romance of the Three Kingdoms and Zhang's of Jin Ping Mei featured dufa (讀法 lit. "way to read") which interpreted the novels using a vocabulary and critical standards which up to then had been limited to poetry and painting. This innovation raised the status of fiction for Chinese readers and made the writing of fiction into a respectable activity for educated people.

Jin believed that only the emperor and wise sages could truly "author" a work. He points out that even Confucius took pains to avoid being named the author of the Spring and Autumn Annals. In Jin's view, the authoring of books by commoners would lead to the undermining of heavenly order and peace. He saw his commentary as the only way to minimize the damage caused by books "authored" by those who were unworthy to do so. In writing his commentaries, Jin firmly believed that the story that was written should be read on its own terms, apart from reality. In his commentary on Romance of the Western Chamber, he wrote, "the meaning lies in the writing, and does not lie in the event". In other words, it is the story that is written that matters, rather than how well that story emulates reality. At the same time, Jin believed that authorial intention is less important than the commentator's reading of a story. In his Romance of the Western Chamber commentary, he writes, "Xixiang Ji is not a work written by an individual named Wang Shifu alone; If I read it carefully, it will also be a work of my own creation, because all the words in Xixiang Ji happen to be the words that I want to say and that I want to write down".

Major works

Shuihu Zhuan commentary

Jin's first major critical activity, completed in 1641, was a commentary on the popular Chinese novel Shuihu Zhuan, known in the West as Water Margin, among other names. The commentary begins with three prefaces, in which Jin discusses his reasons for undertaking the commentary, and the achievements of putative Water Margin author Shi Naian. The next section is entitled "How to Read the Fifth Work of Genius". In addition to advice for the reader, this section contains Jin's thoughts on the literary achievements of the novel as a whole. The novel itself comes next, with introductory marks preceding each chapter, and critical comments inserted frequently between passages, sentences, and even words of the text.

Jin's version of Water Margin is most well known for the drastic alterations that he makes to the text. Earlier versions of the text are 100- or 120-chapter in length. Jin deletes a large portion of the story, from the second half of chapter 71 to the end of the novel. In order to bring the modified text to a conclusion, he composes an episode in which Lu Junyi has a vision of the execution of the band, and amends this to the second half of chapter 71. Jin also combines the Prologue of earlier editions with the first chapter, creating a new, single chapter titled "Induction". This forces the renumbering of all subsequent chapters, so Jin's version of Water Margin is referred to by scholars as the "70-Chapter Edition". In addition to the large changes described above, Jin also changes the text of the remaining chapters in three general ways. First, he improves the consistency of some sections, such that, for example, chapters whose content do not match their titles receive new names. Secondly, Jin makes the text more compact by removing sections that he feels do not advance the story, and by excising the incidental Shi and Ci verses. Finally, Jin makes subtle changes to the text for pure literary effect. These changes range from emphasizing the emotions of characters to changing story elements to make them more compelling.

Jin's critical commentary frequently oscillates between sympathizing with the individual bandit-heroes and condemning their status as outlaws. On one hand, he criticizes the evil official system that has led many of the 108 heroes to become bandits. He also expresses admiration for several of the men. On the other hand, he calls the band "malignant" and "evil". He especially criticizes Song Jiang, the leader of the group. Jin's removal of the last 30 (or 50) chapters of the novel can be seen as an extension of his condemnation of banditry. In these chapters, the bandits are pardoned by Imperial edict, and are put in service of the country. Jin's version, by contrast, has all of the bandits captured and executed. He follows this ending with eight reasons why outlawry can never be tolerated.

Later readers of Jin have advanced two main theories for his divergent positions of admiring the bandits and yet denouncing them as a group. Hu Shih argues that China during Jin's life was being torn apart by two bands of outlaws, so Jin did not believe that banditry should be glorified in fiction. This agrees well with Jin's philosophy. His Buddhist and Taoist beliefs advocated natural development for every individual in society, while the Confucian part of him respected the emperor and the state as the ultimate authority. The other possibility is that Jin's attempt to reimage the novel into a condemnation of the bandits was to save the novel after it had been banned by the Chongzhen Emperor. This second theory is far-fetched, as the emperor's decree banning the novel was not promulgated until a year after the completion of Jin's commentary. Jin's views on the characters aside, he has unconditional praise for the novel as a work of art. He praises the vivid and lively characters of the novel, saying, "Shui-hu tells a story of 108 men: yet each has his own nature, his own temperament, his own outward appearance, and his own voice". He also praises the work's vivid description of events, frequently remarking that the prose is "like a picture". Finally, Jin appreciates the technical virtuosity of the author, and names 15 separate techniques used by Shi Naian.

Xixiang Ji commentary

In 1656, Jin completed his second major commentary, written on Xixiang Ji, a 13th-century Yuan Dynasty play known in English as Romance of the Western Chamber. This commentary follows a structure very similar to Jin's earlier Shuihu Zhuan commentary. It begins with two prefaces outlining Jin's reasons for writing the commentary followed by a third with notes on how the play should be read. The play itself follows, with introductory marks preceding each chapter and critical comments frequently inserted in the text itself. Jin undertakes fewer major structural alterations in this commentary than he does in critiquing Water Margin. Each of parts I, III, IV, and V of the play is originally preceded by an "Induction". Jin merges these into the acts themselves. Part II of the play originally consists of five acts, which Jin condenses into four by merging the first and second acts.

As with Water Margin, Jin frequently makes editorial changes to the play itself. These changes fall into two broad categories. Many changes are made in order to make the play's two young lovers, Zhang Sheng and Cui Yingying, act and speak in accordance with their high class backgrounds. Jin particularly expresses his admiration for Yingying's beauty and character, and modifies any scenes which he feels painted her in too vulgar a light. Other changes are made for the simple reason of achieving superior literary effect. In the arias of the play, these changes include removing supernumerary words and changing words to more vivid descriptors. The strict metrical requirements of the aria format makes it difficult for Jin to make large-scale changes to these sections. However, some changes do violate the rhyme scheme as it existed during the Tang Dynasty or the rules of prosody. In the spoken sections of the play, Jin is much more liberal in making editorial changes. Many of these are intended to accentuate the emotions of the characters. The end result is that Jin's version of the play is an excellent literary work, but was viewed by contemporaries as unfit for the stage.

In his commentary, Jin frequently criticizes previous "unknowledgeable" readers, saying that they have missed many hidden meanings in the text. He sees it as his duty as a knowledgeable reader to reveal these meanings which the author has placed for him to find. In doing so, Jin also has the goal of portraying the play as worthy of study due to its deep technical, artistic, psychological, and social dimensions. In content, much of Jin's critical comments focus on the skill of the author in conveying emotions. Jin praises Romance of the West Chamber as "of the most marvelous of writing between heaven and earth". Other comments focus on Yingying. As mentioned above, Jin feels that she is the central character of the play, and a woman of great beauty and character. Jin feels that the play shows a great degree of unity and tightness in its structure. This opinion can be seen explicitly in his comments, as well as in the fact that he does not make structural alterations to the play to nearly the degree as in his version of Water Margin. Jin does, however, comment on Part V of the play. This part has been thought by some commentators to be a continuation added by an author other than Wang Shifu. Jin agrees with this view, criticizing the last part as being inferior in quality to the previous sections and continuing the story past its vital point.

Reputation and legacy

Many of Jin's contemporaries admired him as a man possessing great literary talent. Qian Qianyi, a famous scholar, official, and historian of the late Ming Dynasty, proclaimed that Jin was possessed by a spirit, explaining his talent. In a biography of Jin, Liao Yan wrote that Jin had discovered the entire secret of competition. Some contemporaries and later writers did denounce Jin on moral grounds. Jin's contemporary Kui Zhuang called him "greedy, perverse, licentious, and eccentric".

After the May Fourth Movement in 1919, scholars such as Hu Shih began to advocate the writing of novels in Vernacular Chinese. As a result, Jin gained recognition as a pioneer in the field of Chinese popular literature. Hu Shih himself praised Jin in the preface to his commentary on the Water Margin, saying, "Sheng-t'an's ability to debate was invincible; his pen was most persuasive. During his time, he had the reputation of a genius. His death was also a case of extreme cruelty, which shook the whole country. After his death, his reputation became even greater". Liu Bannong, another scholar of the era, also praised Jin's version of Water Margin as the best edition in terms of literary value.

After the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, many common views on history changed. Under the Communist government, Water Margin became a tale of peasant resistance to the ruling class, and Romance of the West Chamber symbolized the casting off of the outmoded traditional marriage system. Jin's critiques and editorial modifications of these works did not mirror the world view of Marxism, however, and he began to be criticized. In more recent years, however, Chinese historians have adopted a more balanced view of Jin.

Notes and references