My impression is that the popular consciousness only emphasizes parts from that novel, like the famous 武松打虎, as standalone snippets the people are familiar with, and absent of most of the context before and after the event.
Yeah, and my point is part of the story is not sufficient when talking about the whole. This is why it's pissing me off when people come out and straight up saying they're ignoring 50% of the book while trying to tell me the themes of the book.
I wouldn't even say anti-government is required
I specifically mentioned Wuxia is Pro-establishment, aka it's pro government. Wuxia is uncritical of the status quo.
In the Condor trilogy, 郭靖 & 黄蓉 & all their followers died at Xiangyang from the Mongol army
Hold up. By book 3, 郭靖 was no longer the main character. This is nowhere comparable to the actual main characters dying in tragedy through betrayal, some of whom died within a chapter of the turning point.
Similar for 五鼠, their deaths (except 白玉堂) were handled in books where they're no longer the focus. In 白玉堂's case, he died because of hubris, which has been foreshadowed.
Again, it's about context. In Water Margins, out of the 108 characters, 宋江 is the most main character, being their leader and emotional glue. Yet his conclusion is to be assassinated by poisoned wine given to him by a fellow civil officer because the government (emperor) never trusted him (and his men) even when using them. The government they served actively tried to kill them off while still trying to extract worth from them while they were alive.
It's like both Hamlet and Agamemnon died through betrayal, but the context of their deaths are completely different. Agamemnon died off screen as far as Iliad was concerned while Hamlet's death is the entire purpose of the play. You can't try to argue Agamemnon is serving the same literary purpose as Hamlet because they both "died from betrayal". Nor can you try to make the case Iliad and Hamlet are the same genre just because they both "take place in historical times (relative to author's time) and there's a lot of fighting".
Genre wise, Water Margins shares more similarities with Hamlet than it does with with Iliad despite all the fighting.
Wuxia isn't also necessarily about celebrating the protagonist. I mean, there are plenty of anti-hero protagonists in the genre.
Yes, genres evolve and mixing of genres happen. That can be talked about on a case by case basis. But heroism is a predominant thematic preoccupation. Water Margins is far more concerned with the details of peasant life than the ideals of heroism. Despite the book inspiring the Wuxia genre, the work itself is not Wuxia because its thematic preoccupation is elsewhere.
no subject
Yeah, and my point is part of the story is not sufficient when talking about the whole. This is why it's pissing me off when people come out and straight up saying they're ignoring 50% of the book while trying to tell me the themes of the book.
I specifically mentioned Wuxia is Pro-establishment, aka it's pro government. Wuxia is uncritical of the status quo.
Hold up. By book 3, 郭靖 was no longer the main character. This is nowhere comparable to the actual main characters dying in tragedy through betrayal, some of whom died within a chapter of the turning point.
Similar for 五鼠, their deaths (except 白玉堂) were handled in books where they're no longer the focus. In 白玉堂's case, he died because of hubris, which has been foreshadowed.
Again, it's about context. In Water Margins, out of the 108 characters, 宋江 is the most main character, being their leader and emotional glue. Yet his conclusion is to be assassinated by poisoned wine given to him by a fellow civil officer because the government (emperor) never trusted him (and his men) even when using them. The government they served actively tried to kill them off while still trying to extract worth from them while they were alive.
It's like both Hamlet and Agamemnon died through betrayal, but the context of their deaths are completely different. Agamemnon died off screen as far as Iliad was concerned while Hamlet's death is the entire purpose of the play. You can't try to argue Agamemnon is serving the same literary purpose as Hamlet because they both "died from betrayal". Nor can you try to make the case Iliad and Hamlet are the same genre just because they both "take place in historical times (relative to author's time) and there's a lot of fighting".
Genre wise, Water Margins shares more similarities with Hamlet than it does with with Iliad despite all the fighting.
Yes, genres evolve and mixing of genres happen. That can be talked about on a case by case basis. But heroism is a predominant thematic preoccupation. Water Margins is far more concerned with the details of peasant life than the ideals of heroism. Despite the book inspiring the Wuxia genre, the work itself is not Wuxia because its thematic preoccupation is elsewhere.