Christian Schwermann – författare

In vormodernen Monarchien beobachten wir Widerspruch und Widerstand gegen einzelne Herrscher, ihre politischen Entscheidungen und ihre Verwaltung, aber in der Regel keine direkten Angriffe auf die Ordnungsprinzipien und das politische System. Wenn Unzufriedenheit zu Aufständen und Revolten führten, blieb es normalerweise bei einem bloßen Austausch des Regenten. Subtilere Methoden der Herrscherkritik konnten sich mittels fester Usancen oder spezifischer Codes und Spielregeln innerhalb des legalen Rahmens Gehör verschaffen und zielten darauf ab, die Qualitäten des Regenten zu verbessern oder spezifische Modi der Amtsführung zu reformieren. Diese verschiedenen Formen und Praktiken von Herrscherkritik in vormodernen monarchischen Gesellschaften sind Gegenstand dieses Bandes.When looking at pre-modern monarchical societies, one does not expect to observe fundamental dissent directed at the social order as such or at the political system. As a rule, criticism was limited to individual monarchs, their performance and decisions. While discontent could lead to insurrection and rebellion, which normally only culminated in the ruler being replaced by another monarchical figurehead, the subtler methods of voicing criticism were applied within a framework of legality, of a set of customs or of a code of rules of the game and intended to improve the performance of the incumbent or reform his conduct at court. The various forms of verbal or staged censure of rulers in pre-modern monarchical societies are the subject of this volume.

Early Chinese inscriptions show that already the kings of the Western Zhou period (1045–771 BCE) called upon officials to submit remonstrances. However, it was not until the Warring States period (fifth century BCE to 221 BCE) that remonstrance was explained to mean that monarchical rule would be optimized if officials could object to the monarch''s decisions. This book examines the history of remonstrance in China from conceptual, institutional, literary, and comparative perspectives, pointing out parallels to European institutions and the expression of dissent in modern China. Special attention is paid to the historical semantics of remonstrance, the strategies and intentions of remonstrants, and the perspective of the rulers who instrumentalized criticism to pursue their own goals.

Early Chinese inscriptions show that already the kings of the Western Zhou period (1045–771 BCE) called upon officials to submit remonstrances. However, it was not until the Warring States period (fifth century BCE to 221 BCE) that remonstrance was explained to mean that monarchical rule would be optimized if officials could object to the monarch’s decisions. This book examines the history of remonstrance in China from conceptual, institutional, literary, and comparative perspectives, pointing out parallels to European institutions and the expression of dissent in modern China. Special attention is paid to the historical semantics of remonstrance, the strategies and intentions of remonstrants, and the perspective of the rulers who instrumentalized criticism to pursue their own goals.

Did East Asian literatures, ranging from bronze inscriptions to zazen treatises, lack a concept of authorship before their integration into classical modernity? The answer depends on how one defines the term author. Starting out with a critical review of recent theories of authorship, this edited volume distinguishes various author functions, which can be distributed among several individuals and need not be integrated into a single source of textual meaning. Chinese, Japanese, and Korean literary traditions cover the whole spectrum from 'weak' composite to 'strong' individual forms and concepts of authorship. Divisions on this scale can be equated with gradual differences in the range of self-articulation. Contributors are Roland Altenburger, Alexander Beecroft, Marion Eggert, Simone Müller, Christian Schwermann, and Raji Steineck.