Drama as entertainment and political tool at the Qing court

While some existing Western works demonstrate links betweenPekingopera and urban society and its sensitivity (Goldman 2012, Mackerras 1972, 1990), or its participation in “colonial modernization” (Goldstein 2007), the reviewed book contributes largely to our understanding of the earlier stages of opera development. Unlike the majority of studies on Chinese theatrical tradition, which stresses its artistic qualities and history of formation (Su Yi 2013, Wang Ruzong 2011, etc.), the reviewed book pays greater attention to the social, political and cultural contexts of the performances. The author successfully portrays various aspects of Qing operatic tradition both inside and outside the palace and convincingly demonstrates the influence the court produced on the aesthetics ofPekingopera. Apart from being a crucial part of highly ritualized court life, drama also worked as a political tool, reflecting current events in the empire and glorifying the dynasty and its victories, thus becoming one of the channels of Manchu ethnic identity formation. Ye Xiaoqing concludes that knowledge of the plots and the circumstances of their staging enhances our understanding of the personalities of Qing emperors and their relations with other major figures at the court, allowing glimpses of power struggles (e.g. Emperor Qianlong vs. his brother). Therefore, the reader can vision Qing emperors not just as a part of “institutional history” (p.11), or a “stereotype without individual interests” (p.12), as has been customary of Chinese historic tradition, but human beings with whimsies and dislikes.

The title of the book springs from the title of the drama Ascendant Peace in the Four Seas (Sihai shengping 四海昇平), performed for the delegation of Lord Macartney at Qianlong’s court in 1793 to allude that they were unwelcome. All Qing emperors were fond of drama with different degrees of affection, with the golden age of court performances taking place during the reigns of Qianlong and Guangxu. The Southern Residence (established by Emperor Kangxi circa 1683-1686) was responsible for court performances and the emperor’s entertainment. It was administered by eunuchs and functioned under jurisdiction of the Ministry of Palace Affairs (Neiwufu內務府), also run by eunuchs. During its heyday, the number of Southern Residence employees counted up to the thousands, including eunuch administrators and actors, musicians, apprentices, and tutors, hundreds of actors performing in kun 崑 and yiqiang 戈腔 styles were brought from Suzhou.

In 1827, Emperor Daoguang reorganized the Southern Residence into the Bureau of Ascending Peace. The newly established Bureau enjoyed greater autonomy and directly employed residents of Peking instead of southerners, thus signifying the actual formation of Pekingopera as a genre. The Bureau even executed control over the Peking actors` guild located in the JingzhongTemple精忠廟, which received orders from the palace through specifically organized yamen 衙門. The area of authority granted to the Bureau was never clearly defined, yet it examined all the drama scripts to be performed in the capital and administered invitation of famous actors to the palace.

Chapter Two lists the types of occasions for palace performances, such as dramas for state rituals and auspicious and felicitous rites (the most important were sacrifices at the Temple of Heaven on winter solstice, the New Year and the Emperor’s birthday); dramas for celebrating military victories associated with martial rites performed in the presence of foreign visitors; and dramas for less formal occasions. Their plots often featured deities, saints and immortals from the popular pantheon (e.g. the god of happiness (xishen 喜神)). Routine drama performances were linked to calendar festivals, which took place on the first and fifteenth day of each lunar month. Plays of exorcising evil staged during the fifth month matched the customs of the general public and featured Heavenly Master Zhang Daoling 張道陵 as an exorcist. Since we come across similar customs, symbols and characters in both palace and folk celebrations, we cannot help questioning the long debated dichotomy of “official vs. popular” versions of Chinese religion. This chapter mentions interesting details regarding the hunting drama The Star of Longevity Goes Hunting (Shouxing dawei 壽星打圍), with non-Han elements and characters speaking Manchu.

Chapter Three discusses how palace eunuchs low on the social scale made their way upward through acting and assumes that “all the powerful eunuchs were outstanding opera performers” (p.133). Eunuchs serving at the Bureau of Ascending Peace often abused their power when selecting capital troupes to perform in the palace. Chapter Four investigates methods and campaigns analogous to a “literary inquisition” initiated by Qing rulers to establish strict control and censorship over seditious plays and drama scripts. For instance, Qianlong ordered the confiscation and destruction of Song to Ming scripts with suspicious historical plots, and the government prohibited librettos reflecting events of the ruling dynasty, as well as stories about rebels, sex and violence. Nevertheless, some emperors were not really keen on didactic and ritual dramas and instead preferred the banned plays. Chapter Five discusses how court regulations and the personal tastes of the emperors directly influenced the formation of Pekingopera. Kangxi and Qianlong were purists; they loved the elite kunqu崑曲opera and rejected popular performing styles (e.g. luantan亂彈, qinqiang 秦腔) as vulgar and prohibited them in the capital. But during Emperor Jiaqing’s reign, regional low-class forms of drama made their way to the palace. The book concludes with statements that elitist standards of court opera performances could no longer be sustained by the end of the nineteenth century. Despite prohibitions due to fears of weakening the military, Manchu bannermen maintained the largest audience in the theatres of Peking so thatPeking opera enjoyed a much higher standing then sheer entertainment and “participated in social change” (p.267).

Although the structure of the book seems a little loose and one misses the firmer theoretical framework, this does not detract from its informational value. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the author briefly mentions the palace morality play Golden Rules Exhorting Goodness (Quan shan jin ke 勸善金科) (p.98), stating that it was composed by minister Zhang Zhao張照 during early Qianlong era. However, recent research has proven that this play was being regularly staged since the Kangxi era, and Zhang Zhao had just revised it some (Dai Yun 2006).

References

Zhongguo guojia tushuguan cang qinggong shengpingshu dang`an jicheng (quan 108 ce) 中國國家圖書館藏清宮昇平署檔案集成 (全108冊) (Collection of Shengpingshu archives from Qing palace kept at the National Library of China, 108 volumes). Zhongguo guojia tushuguan bian,  2011.

Su Yi蘇移2013. Jingju fazhan shilüe 京劇發展史略 (Brief history of the development ofPeking opera).Beijing:Beijing yanshan chubanshe.

Wang Ruzong 王如宗ed. 2011. Tujie jingju yishu圖解京劇藝朮 (Graphic explanation ofBeijing opera art).Beijing: Qinghua daxue chubanshe. 

Mackerras, C.1972. The rise of the Peking Opera, 1770-1870: social aspects of the theatre in Manchu China.Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Mackerras, C. 1990. Chinese Drama: a Historical Survey. Peking:New World Press.

Goldstein, Joshua 2007. Drama Kings: Players and Publics in the Re-creation of Peking Opera, 1870-1937.Berkeley:University ofCalifornia Press,

Goldman, Andrea Sue 2012, Opera and the City: The Politics of Culture in Beijing, 1770-1900. Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press.

Dai Yun 戴云2006. “Quan shan jin ke” yanjiu《勸善金科》研究 (Study of the Golden Rules Exhorting Goodness). Beijing:Beijing shifan daxue chubanshe.