Popular readings of The Romance Of The Three Kingdoms are a key example of the historical novel being interpreted as the historical truth. Often described as part-historical, part-fiction, part-legend, the book situates itself at the centre of the debate over how much historians can truly learn from novels written in the past, about the past. While The Three Kingdoms can definitely tell us about the ideals valued at the time it was published/made popular, the extent which it can be considered historically accurate is questionable.
In particular, the style of writing of the ‘heroes’ in the novel, especially of Guan Yu, is clearly emphasised for literary purposes. Chinese men consistently view the three protagonists, Lui Bei, Guan Yu, and Zhang Fei as models of masculine behaviour [1]. Yet, the patterns of masculine behaviour taken from these emphasised ‘hero’ characters have not remained fixed but rather differ depending on the time of reading, and the qualities seen to be associated with each character have changed over time. For example, contemporary popular opinion of Guan Yu was very positive at the time of writing, and so descriptions of him as a hero were emphasised to fit this.
C. T. Hsia analyses Luo’s use of literary techniques in his writing of heroes. He identifies a key flaw in Guan Yu’s heroism: namely, his arrogance. Hsia asserts that this was a purposeful literary technique in order to bring together the historical descriptions and the mythic qualities of the character and provides an emotional attachment to an otherwise unemotional historical text.
“The arrogance and simple-mindedness are essential to Lo’s concept of a hero cursed with the tragic disease of hubris; without this flaw, a storybook hero of divine prowess would have been insufferable.” [2]
Following the deaths of the two characters Guan Yu and Zhang Fei, Liu Bei is turned into a tragic hero seeking vengeance. Hsia describes the actions that follow in the novel as “Lui Bei the man” standing in the way of “Lui Bei the politician-idealist.” [4] Furthermore, the relationship between Lui Bei and his minister shortly before his death is painted as “friendship fortified by a common ideal,” and Hsia argues that in combining both political and emotional undertones in Lui Bei’s final scene, it turns him into a character of “historical credibility.” [5].
Hsia further comments how most protagonists in the novel are seeking fame, but a number of marginal characters exist to ridicule the protagonists for this. Hsia suggests that in examining official histories during writing, Luo felt “duty-bound” to include all notable men mentioned [2]. However, Hsia is enthusiastic to emphasise the historical accuracy of the novel, naming it “popular literature with a difference” [3]. He compares Luo Guanzhong to Sima Qian in his scholarly efforts and continuation of historical tradition, and praises Luo Guanzhong for achieving an “impersonal objectivity” in his writing [3]. Hsia’s analysis of the novel is purely literary, however, emphasising the novel as a novel of ‘human nature’ whilst claiming its historical validity. Furthermore, his focus solely on themes of hero and lack of commentary on the female characters in the novel, who teach striking lessons in their own right, reveals his analysis as shallow and too focused on the aspects of masculinity found in the novel.
[1] Besio, Kimberly, ‘Zhuge Ling and Zhang Fei: Bowang shao tun and Competing Masculine Ideals in the Development of the Three Kingdoms Story Cycle’, in Besio, Kimberly Ann, and Constantine Tung, eds. Three Kingdoms and Chinese Culture, State University of New York Press (2007) p. 73
[2] Hsia, C. T., ‘The Romance of the Three Kingdoms’ in The Classic Chinese Novel: A Critical Introduction, The Chinese University Press, Hong Kong (2015) p. 46
[3] Hsia, (2015) p. 37
[4] Hsia, (2015) p. 55
[5] Hsia (2015) p. 58