"The Art of War" and traditional Chinese military thought - a discussion

Firn

Active Member
This thread is dedicated to "The Art of War" and other traditional chinese works containing strategems. Only people who have actually carefully read the books in question should participate. A basic understanding of traditional chinese philosophical or mystical concepts provides the very important context.

I and perhaps others will try to

a) provide articles and material to help the understanding of his work.
b) perhaps discuss his work relative to the modern world

We will not discuss this work vs works from other cultures! A second thread might allow that.

First of all: Who wrote "The Art of War"?

Sonshi said:
Interview with Victor Mair
By Sonshi.com

"In general, the Sun Zi's approach to warfare is motivated by the desire to achieve practical results (in simplest terms, victory over one's opponent), not by abstract principles, historical considerations, or spiritual qualms."
Victor Mair

In the specialized world of The Art of War, the most recognizable sinologist is currently Lionel Giles, who translated Sun Tzu's masterpiece in 1910. Since Giles's translation has become public domain, his name is ubiquitous both online and offline in countless repackaged presentations and books -- but all containing the same stale, outdated material.

So when you compare Lionel Giles to modern-day sinologist Dr. Victor H. Mair, you might as well be comparing Henry Ford to Enzo Ferrari. While Giles helped start the ball rolling, Mair advances knowledge of Chinese classics like The Art of War to their furthest limits. His 2007 scholarly book, The Art of War: Sun Zi's Military Methods (published by Columbia University Press), provides not only an accurate translation of The Art of War but also the most recent research into its origin.

With a knack for Sinitic etymology, Sinitic lexicography, and the origins and evolution of Chinese script, Victor Mair pushed for Chinese language reforms in exceptional efforts such as how Chinese dictionaries should be best arranged. Dr. Mair's expertise allows him to break new ground in his Art of War translation and book which contains bold and original data, analyses, and theories. Like a scientist, he methodically asserts evidences to challenge our current knowledge and leaves us with renewed scholarship and appreciation for The Art of War.

Victor Mair is a professor of Chinese language and literature at the University of Pennsylvania. He graduated from Dartmouth College (where he was captain of the Dartmouth basketball team and tasked to guard Bill Bradley from Princeton), served in the Peace Corps in Nepal, and holds a master's degree from University of London and a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He has taught at Kyoto University in Japan and at Sichuan University in China.

For us at Sonshi.com, the interview with Professor Mair was most enlightening, which was very similar to our experience reading The Art of War: Sun Zi's Military Methods. Our recommendation? Read on below, and be sure to buy his book. You won't regret owning this refreshing, authoritative, and well-researched edition.

After much debate and discussion, Sonshi.com is ranking Victor Mair's The Art of War: Sun Zi's Military Methods the #1 Art of War edition; how rare a book that courageously stands up to centuries of established thought, proceeds to knock it down with sound logic and proof, and succeeds in convincing even the Old Guard to change their views.


Sonshi.com: With so many translations of The Art of War available, why should readers consider your new translation?

Mair: First of all, whenever I translate an ancient Chinese text, I always make a strenuous effort, not only to be as accurate as possible, but to convey in English a sense of the style and structure of the original. In other words, my translations may be considered more literarily sensitive and nuanced than most of the other translations that are available. The fact that I was an English major in college before becoming a Sinologist has actually been a great boon in enabling me to express both the content and the form of ancient Chinese texts precisely and felicitously. This is as true of my translation of the Sun Zi as it is of the other Chinese texts I have worked on. If you look at my translation of the Sun Zi and compare it to virtually any other that has been produced, you will immediately see that it has a quite different appearance on the page. When you start to read my translation of the Sun Zi, right away you will notice that the text has a particular rhythm and cadence of its own. You will be able to gain a distinct appreciation of the uniqueness of the Chinese text that is not accessible through any other English translation. I even strive to reproduce in English some of the phonetic and poetic qualities of the original.

Aside from crafting my English translation with the utmost care, I also enjoyed the opportunity to do extensive research on the Sun Zi and write a substantial introduction. In the introduction to the Columbia University Press translation, I have made some completely new contributions to Sun Zi studies. Among these are pointing out and analyzing exactly how the Sun Zi reflects a Taoistic approach to war. I have also shown how technological factors, especially iron metallurgy, were key factors in the emergence of the military milieu in which the Sun Zi materialized. Finally, a sort of trademark of my scholarship, I not only place the Sun Zi securely in Chinese history, I also relate it to developments that were occurring elsewhere in Eurasia just before and during the period when it grew up. Additional novel aspects of my introduction and notes will be discussed in my answers to your other questions below.


Sonshi.com: We wanted to hear your personal answer to our question above, but in our opinion, you have produced the most significant scholarly work on The Art of War since the 1990s. For example, you boldly asserted that Sun Tzu and Sun Pin might very well be the same person, and you backed your assertion with solid evidence in your book's Introduction. Sun Tzu "Master Sun" does indeed sound much more respectable than Sun Pin "knee-capped Sun." Why do you think past scholars have overlooked this or at least didn't take it seriously?

Mair: Thank you very much for your kind assessment of my work. Coming from a site that is noted for its serious attention to the entire range of Sun Zi studies, your positive reaction to my book means a lot to me.

I suppose that one of the reasons I was able to make the breakthroughs that I have achieved in my Sun Zi is that, by nature, I have a critical, skeptical mind. I was born to be a scientist, but -- for various personal reasons that I won't go into here -- I ended up becoming a humanist. So, I think that -- above all -- it was my innately scientific spirit that enabled me to venture into areas of the Sun Zi that other scholars may not even have contemplated.

Beyond my own qualifications and predispositions, however, I must acknowledge the great debt that I owe to the work of the Danish scholar, Jens Østergård Petersen, who provided the raw data concerning the relationship between Sun Zi and Sun Pin/Bin that enabled me to formulate my own hypothesis concerning them. Of course, before I was able to do that, I had to seek out Dr. Petersen's work, read it conscientiously, and assimilate it thoroughly.


Sonshi.com: Another fascinating area you researched was the dates of when each chapter of The Art of War was written. For instance, the ninth chapter was likely written in 345 BCE and the thirteenth chapter in 272 BCE. This suggests many authors. Why do you believe past scribes decided to name only "Sun Tzu" the author?

Mair: Here, as I did in the book, I must give credit to the marvelous, awe-inspiring research of E. Bruce Brooks and A. Taeko Brooks. Their investigations over the last two decades and more have demonstrated that, not only the Sun Zi, but essentially all of the other pre-Qin texts that are ascribed to individual "masters" (zi / tzu), such as the Mo Zi, the Lao Zi, and the Zhuang Zi, are the products of an accretional process of political and intellectual debate. As to why, in the particular case we are discussing, the scribes and editors who were responsible for putting together and transmitting the text known as the Sun Zi decided to use the name Sun Zi ("Master Sun") to represent the collective or composite authorship of this classic, I would say that -- already by the time of its compilation -- the surname Sun had taken on an almost hallowed cachet as the font of military wisdom.


Sonshi.com: Yet another area you looked into was the use of the "gu" character or "therefore." It is used 1.5 percent of the time, compared with much lower usage in other similar Chinese works. The striking point you made was that "over half of the succeeding clauses in the Sun Zi manifestly do not follow from the preceding clauses" whenever "gu" was used. Furthermore, you asserted in many places The Art of War was "loosely cobbled" together. Why do you think past scribes didn't correct this problem?

Mair: An excellent question! The best answer I can give is that it was the very nature of the Sun Zi to be cumulative. By the time the text had taken on a critical mass and definable shape, sometime after the first quarter of the 3rd c. BC, it had already acquired the status of an authoritative source for tactics and strategy. Although later thinkers did sometimes tinker with the text, by the time they received it, the Sun Zi had -- for all intents and purposes -- become a classic, and a classic is something that one does not knowingly or lightly attempt to improve.

The situation with the Sun Zi is quite comparable to that which pertains to the Bible. Critical scholarship has long been aware of authorial complexities surrounding the scriptures, but it is only in modern times that systematic analysis of the entire Bible has been thinkable -- perhaps because scholars nowadays are less constrained by the sacred authority of the past than heretofore.


Sonshi.com: You are the editor and founder of the Sino-Platonic Papers, an academic journal that examines diverse aspects of Chinese language, and have led expeditions in Eastern Central Asia, which resulted in numerous publications and films. With your diverse background and experience, why do you think The Art of War became so popular throughout the world (as compared to other similar Chinese works)?

Mair: There are many reasons why the Sun Zi became the dominant military classic of ancient China and has extended its influence throughout the world into modern times. Here I'll just rattle off a few of the operative factors that come to my mind without much reflection:

1. among its potential competitors it was the first out of the chute;
2. it was of a sufficient size to have considerable weight, but not so long that it would tax the memory;
3. very much like the Tao Te Ching, it is full of gnomic wisdom that is vague enough to be applied in a wide variety of different contexts, yet specific enough to afford practical guidance;
4. overall, it espouses a point of view pertaining to the resolution of conflict that has arguable merit.


Sonshi.com: The Art of War is required reading for all US Marine officers and current US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates quoted Sun Zi on at least two occasions last year in front of Congress, stating it contains concepts applicable to today's US military policy. What are your thoughts on the modern applicability of this ancient Chinese text?

Mair: This is a text that is over two thousand years old, so naturally there are obvious aspects of the Sun Zi that are no longer relevant to today's world. On the other hand, there are also aspects of the work that are ageless, such as the injunction to know yourself and know your enemy.


Sonshi.com: Other than what we discussed, what do you think is the most misunderstood verse or idea in The Art of War by readers?

Mair: That's a difficult question. After giving it some thought, however, I would say that the most poorly understood idea in the Sun Zi is that expressed in the celebrated statement that "Warfare is a way of deception." Too many people think that this gives a license to lie. I would suggest, rather, that what Sun Zi was getting at here is not sheer mendacity, but the need for the general to conceal from the enemy his true intentions. The skilled general (or athlete, businessman, etc.) should lead his opponent into believing that he will surely adopt a certain course of action or movement, then surprise the daylights out of him by executing a totally different tack.

[End of interview]


Want an accurate translation and the latest research? Dr. Mair's The Art of War: Sun Zi's Military Methods, ranked #1 by Sonshi.com, is one edition you can't do without.
Sonshi has a wealth of information about the book (and others) in question.
 

TrangleC

New Member
I think it is 10 years ago that i read The Art Of War and i was rather disapointed by it. Of course it could be that i'm just too stupid, but after reading it i didn't understand how some people consider it such a great thing and claim that it gives you a recipe for success in warfare, business and even human relations.
All i found was a book that seems to be written by a "know it all" type of guy. With that i mean, it seemed to me as if Sun Tzu just looked at certain mistakes made by leaders in battle and gave advise on what they should have been doing better without forming a clear and consistend strategy out of all those bits of advise and he keeps it absolutely general and never really tells you how to do the things he tells you to do.

Also to me it seemed as if there were some contradictions in it.
For example at one point he sais: "Don't besiege cities, but ignore them and move on."
And at another point he sais: "Don't leave a enemy behind to fall into your back." or something like that.

I almost think he made it all up just as he went along.

To me reading it just felt a bit like listening to the guy who stands behind you while you work, watches you and gives you useless advise.

He only tells you what you should achieve, but without telling you how you can achieve it.
Stuff like: "When you are strong, make your enemy believe you are weak. When you are weak, make your enemy believe you are strong. When you are far away, make your enemy believe you are near and when you are near, make him believe you are far away."

All i can think when reading something like that is: Thanks, dude.

I mean, seriously, who wouldn't be able to come up with stuff like that himself? It might have been impressive if he would actually tell you how you do that, but how much of an stratetical genius does it take to tell others: "It would be good if your enemy wouldn't know too much about what you are doing."?
That is basically all the book tells you.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
I think it is 10 years ago that i read The Art Of War and i was rather disappointed by it...

To me reading it just felt a bit like listening to the guy who stands behind you while you work, watches you and gives you useless advise.

I mean, seriously, who wouldn't be able to come up with stuff like that himself? It might have been impressive if he would actually tell you how you do that, but how much of an strategical genius does it take to tell others: "It would be good if your enemy wouldn't know too much about what you are doing."?

That is basically all the book tells you.
I have refrained from commenting earlier, as I feel particularly unqualified to do so, having never read "The Art of War' in Chinese and have been considered by my former Chinese teachers as a poor student on the subject. Except for memorizing a few Chinese literary phrases, I am not well schooled in the Chinese literary tradition. However, I would like to provide my reply below:

'The Art of War' was rediscovered and became an American military education staple after the Vietnam war. This is because Vietnamese military leaders like Gen. Vo Nguyan Giap is known to have studied Sun Tze (read this link which provides context). Further, the text has influenced many other notable historical figures and its ideas has been instrumental from a historical perspective. For example, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of a unified China, was influenced by ideas in the text and was able to bring the the Period of the Warring States to an end.

It is not unusual for a first time Western reader to be disappointed with his ability to understand the Chinese text, as many first time Western readers have not taken the trouble to do the necessary background reading. Just because you can't understand the text, does not mean it is useless. It just means it is not reader friendly to a modern book reading consumer like you. Further, some of the ideas are expressed in a tautological or self evident manner - it's just the literary/writing style of that era (and you are reading a translated text, from a certain historical period in a specific cultural context).

Keep in mind that it is also a literary work that was written over 2,500 years ago. The expressive style of the language used in the 'The Art of War' makes Shakespearean English look modern. Do you speak in Shakespearean English? I speak Mandarin (or Putonghua) but I certainly do not speak in such a high flown literary manner even to my friends/business associates in China. I hope you will take a look at some more links and do a little more reading before pronouncing judgment.
 
Last edited:

Firn

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
I have refrained from commenting earlier, as I feel particularly unqualified to do so, having never read "The Art of War' in Chinese and have been considered by my former Chinese teachers as a poor student on the subject. Except for memorizing a few Chinese literary phrases, I am not well schooled in the Chinese literary tradition. However, I would like to provide my reply below:

'The Art of War' was rediscovered and became an American military education staple after the Vietnam war. This is because Vietnamese military leaders like Gen. Vo Nguyan Giap is known to have studied Sun Tze (read this link which provides context). Further, the text has influenced many other notable historical figures and its ideas has been instrumental from a historical perspective. For example, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of a unified China, was influenced by ideas in the text and was able to bring the Period of the Warring States to an end.

It is not unusual for a first time Western reader to be disappointed with his ability to understand the Chinese text, as many first time Western readers have not taken the trouble to do the necessary background reading. Just because you can't understand the text, does not mean it is useless. It just means it is not reader friendly to a modern book reading consumer like you. Further, some of the ideas are expressed in a tautological or self evident manner - it's just the literary/writing style of that era (and you are reading a translated text, from a certain historical period in a specific cultural context).

Keep in mind that it is also a literary work that was written over 2,500 years ago. The expressive style of the language used in the 'The Art of War' makes Shakespearean English look modern. Do you speak in Shakespearean English? I speak Mandarin (or Putonghua) but I certainly do not speak in such a high flown literary manner even to my friends/business associates in China. I hope you will take a look at some more links and do a little more reading before pronouncing judgment.
Some very wise words of warning, especially concerning the background, the literary style, the specific logic and the language of the era.
One should be aware of some important principles in traditional Chinese thinking and philosophy before reading it.

While I can not judge it, one can imagine that the texts or part of it have to some extent the quality of a poem. It forgoes extensive explanations and precise argumentation in favor of linked tautological statements which are easy to memorize and should provoke thought. I guess some have a "musical" quality, just like a piece of poetry which vibrate in the strings of one's mind.

Some sentences are idealistic because in my opinion they intent to show the ideal which one should strive to achieve. The provide an aim to target and help to it miss as closely as possible.

So as far as I can understand "The Art of War" helps to frame your thinking and incentives you to view the specific subject and decision in a wider strategic context. It addresses many aspects of warfare and provides a way to think about them. It is also normativ in the way it points out what is "best" and ideal and what is "second best", giving a staggered set of options.

Language is an integral part of thinking and I have no doubt that such a easily memorized work influences your way of thinking. It gives you something to hold on in times of difficult decisions and should be a provoking starting point for your mind. This starting point or inspiration helps you than to formulate specific plans and concepts about a specific situation. The well-know format would help you also to work things out with other people by referencing to this classic. So it is more of a guidline to learning and thinking in warfare (and perhaps other fields) - not a exact technical how-to.

This at least part of my limited understanding.
 
Last edited:

the road runner

Active Member
ART OF WAR
Translated by Thomas Cleary

A facinating book that dose provoke thought and dialogue(and consequence of action:) ) on war.I have read the book a number of times and always learn new methods of thought when reading and absorbing the information at hand.To me the book portrays a number of proverbes that must be read a few times and the information absorbed.

You cannot read this book like a novel,better to read it one proverb at a time and think about the proverb through the day.
One i like is

So a skillful military operation should be like a swift snake that counters with its tail when someone strikes at its head,counter with its head when someone strikes at its tail,and counter with both head and tail when someone strikes in the middle.

The above quote could be used to describe a flanking move,when a Line is attacked.

It could also be used by a Martial Arts practioner.

Someone who strikes an your head,you can counter by using a leg kick.

Someone who strikes at leg,you can counter with a Punch to the head.

Someone who strikes at you stomach you can counter with a combination of punches an leg kicks.

A Real Estate Agent could translate this into.............

If a client trys to negotiate to buy a House and uses the Negative to attain a good price I.E Bad wiring/plumbing/old painting ect.

The Agent might counter with argument by saying its in a great neighbourhood,close to transport,you can do alot with this house,maybee if you painted the house,put in a new bathroom and kitchen you could add $100,000 to the value of the asset.

Where you thinking of doing renovations?:D

It dose provoke thought, and your brain is always your best weapon.
maybee second best:Ddepending on the scenario you are in
Or third best if you are with a pretty lady:D

Just how you interpret it i guess......
 
Last edited:

Firn

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Btw, thanks for the link. IMHO the text was somewhat "American" - by this term I don't want to offend neither writer or the USA. It did some good by showing the reader some of the important context. But he is perhaps too forcefull in his interpretations, like whe he discusses the "uncovered principles" and his want to point out the possible influences on successfull generals. (It might be strange that I write this after having discussed the interpretations of Mao and Lenin of "On War" - the key difference is that we know that both have studied him with keen interest and used him also as a reference. We can not demostrate that either Napoleon or Lawrence even only read "The Art of War".)

So a critical and sceptical approach to his interpretation is very important.
 
Top