Comments on those things in the Ming dynasty

20 17 1222

Things in the Ming Dynasty are like a satire.

When you talk about history with personal feelings, you will become objective. Even if they are all historical facts, it may be easy to avoid the importance, describe and publicize historical figures according to his preferences, and cultivate readers who share his views. It is not objective to praise the advantages of the characters he likes, attack the shortcomings of the characters he doesn't like and downplay some controversial things. In other words, it is called spring and autumn brushwork.

As a popular historical reading, it gives people a history with personal prejudice. I don't know if such a work can stand up to the word "popular science". If you don't want to do popular science, change your name to Random Talk of Ming Dynasty. The article first declares: "This book contains many personal feelings." Then, describe historical events in a seemingly real way. Readers should pay attention to this when reading: this paragraph is historical facts, this paragraph is opinions, and this paragraph is lyrical, which is very tiring. Therefore, in order to save trouble, readers should not distinguish, just believe everything and take what the author said as historical facts. Whether the author intentionally or unintentionally, the final result is mostly like this. Readers are led by the author's inflammatory words, which not only agrees with the author's view of history, but also allows readers to agree with the author's values. This is the real smuggling.

For example, where Zhu Yuanzhang killed heroes in his later period, he didn't read how detailed the author wrote, ignoring the deaths of many heroes. Instead of criticizing the bad behavior of killing heroes, he seems to be defending it, saying that it is all for his descendants and that it is the loneliness of the emperor. It seems that he should do so. Judy usurped and seized power, but the author has always stressed that he "endured for so many years" and "I died if the rebellion was unsuccessful, and I had no way out", and portrayed him as a hero. The author writes directly from Judy's standpoint, completely unaware that Judy's war for his power desire has brought profound disasters to the people. Is it still called "three views" to hold such a heroic view of history and joke about history?

Reading history should be objective and calm. We are bystanders of history, not witnesses of history. During this year, Yue Ming constantly substituted himself into historical figures and readers with great emotion. By avoiding the heavy and neglecting the light, complex historical figures are shaped into stereotypes. This man is tenacious and forbearing, that man is insidious and cunning, that man is loyal and that man is opportunistic. What is the difference between this and the writing of Cao Cao's white face, Guan Yu's red face and Zhang Fei's black face in the Three Kingdoms? Creating heroes and taking the lead in worshipping heroes, many readers are deeply moved and worship heroes, but they don't know that they worship the statue of Guan Gong carefully built by the author, not Guan Gong himself.

No wonder many people read "Those Things in the Ming Dynasty" and became the bright powder of adhering to nationalism. You can't blame the reader. This book is really provocative. Without certain experience accumulation and firm values, it is likely to be taken away by the author.

For example, I wonder if readers can think of it when reading this book.

What if Chen Youliang won the war between Zhu Yuanzhang and Chen Youliang? The author insists that it is impossible for Chen Youliang to win by abusing violence, but is Zhu Yuanzhang merciless in killing heroes, so he is not violent? My point is that if Chen Youliang wins, it is possible to establish a dynasty that lasts for hundreds of years. On the head of history, there is no difference between the emperor's surname Zhu and Chen. If Chen sits in the world, the society will be similar to that of the Ming Dynasty, because history is not created by heroes, but by the people, which is determined by productive forces. This is the viewpoint of mass historical view and historical materialism. If you can realize this, you will feel that Zhu Yuanzhang and Chen Youliang fought hundreds of thousands of troops. Even if Zhu Yuanzhang defeated hundreds of thousands of troops, is there no glory at all? Everything is a historical necessity, and there is no escape from the historical cycle. The author also mentioned the laws of history, but he did not treat these histories calmly, but enthusiastically substituted historical figures. I think this is not an attitude towards history, but an attitude towards novels.

Readers are advised to have a clear head when reading such specious history books. If they feel confused or unreasonable, they should start the search engine to find more authentic historical records, look at other people's comments, weigh them, and then decide which viewpoint to adopt. Instead of being easily brainwashed by the author's infectious language, I believe that what the author said is right. The author has explained that the subjective color of this book is serious. How can we readers easily take the author's words as objective facts? Think twice before you act, and decide which words he says are credible, which aspects are credible, and how much is credible.