As one of China’s most emotionally expressive literary genres, the ci 詞, is an inherently musical genre of literature. The ci originated from court banquet music. “Feast and banquet music of the Sui (581–618) and Tang (618–907) periods were influenced mostly by the songs and music from foreign lands.”¹ In the late Tang dynasty, poets such as Wen Tingyun 溫庭筠 (812–866) and Wei Zhuang 韋莊 (836–910) were not only busy creating poetry in the traditional sense, they also would create new lyrics for existing melodies. These new lyrics, called ci, at the time were also known as shi yu 詩餘, leftover poems.

In 940 CE, during the Later Shu dynasty 後蜀 (934–966), a general’s son named Zhao Chongzuo 趙崇祚 (dates unknown) collected all the ci poems he could find from the late Tang dynasty to the Five Dynasties and Ten States (907–979) period, and compiled them into the first anthology of ci poems, entitled Huajian ji 花間集. The contents of this anthology represent the incipient stage of ci creation. The ci poetry of the subsequent Song (960–1279) dynasty represents its next developmental state, that of maturation and flourishing. If we agree with Wang Guowei’s 王國維 (1877–1927) famous observation that “Every generation has its own representative literary form,”² we can confidently say that ci poetry came to represent the Song’s highest literary achievement.

The three-hundred-year history of the Song saw the emergence of China’s greatest ci poets, such as Liu Yong 柳永 (984–1053), Yan Shu 晏殊 (991–1055), Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (1007–1072), Su Shi 蘇軾 (1037–1101), Qin Guan 秦觀 (1049–1100), Xin Qiji 辛棄疾 (1140–1207), and Jiang Kui 姜夔 (1155–1221). The most famous female poet to come from this time was Li Qingzhao 李清照 (1084–1155). She was also the first to propose that ci poetry has its own unique literary properties and should be considered a genre separate from other poetry, as opposed to the “leftover poetry” it was once considered to be.

The ci form was also quite influential on the development of later literature. The qu 曲 (plays) that came to dominate the literary scene of the Yuan (1206–1368) and Ming (1368–1644) dynasties were in a large part inspired by ci poetry of the late Song. By the Qing (1644–1911) dynasty there was a resurgence of ci creation which was characterized by the creative use of new literary techniques as well as an explosion of the pure amount that was created.

In this special issue focusing on Song dynasty ci research, we present four articles that represent new scholarship within China from this field.

Zhu Huiguo’s 朱惠國 article “Reflecting on a Century of Research on the Tunes and Prosody of Ci” reviews the last century of advancements in the field of ci poetry, focusing on its musicality. These advancements have been multifaceted, including progress in the areas of musical origin, the categorization of melodies, the history and evolution of melodies, as well as research on ci anthologies compiled in the Song dynasty. Chronologically speaking, we can divide the last one hundred years into two phases. During the Republic of China (1912–1949), advances were mostly made regarding the question of how the four tones of Chinese characters were utilized within ci poems. Since the founding of the new republic in 1949, and especially within the 21st Century, research has centered on the meter and rhythm of ci melodies. Based on how the field has evolved up to this point, Zhu has summarized its “problem areas” into four points. First, there is a lack of systematic research which provides commentary and analysis for the entire corpus of Song dynasty ci poems. Second, there is a lack of deep analysis on any given aspect of ci research. Third, there is a lack of interdisciplinary research. Fourth, there is a general lack of appreciation for the academic importance of musicality and prosody in ci research.

The other three articles take various approaches to ci creation and theory, but all have as the common object of their research Liu Yong, one of the Song dynasty’s most famous and representative ci poets.

There is much linguistic repetition within and among ci poetry, especially Liu Yong’s, which is worthy of exploration. Wang Chao’s 汪超 article “A Discussion on Internal Repetition among Liu Yong’s Ci Poems and Its Effects on Their Transmission” focuses specifically on just such repetition. He divides this phenomenon into three types: repetition of characters, repetition of imagery, and repetition of semantic structure. He also posits possible reasons for the various types of repetition, such as who the intended audience was and how much time Liu spent creating certain works. Regardless of the reasons behind the repetition, the author argues that, far from having a negative impact on their reception, the repetition actually helped the spread and appreciation of his ci works. The repetition in Liu’s ci helped to define the genre and set a standard for later ci poets.

In “Liu Yong’s Ci and the New Development of Capital Literary Discourse in the ‘Making’ of Bianjing,” Xie Yan 謝琰 explores how the capital city was depicted in ci poetry. “Capital literature” is a subgenre in itself, and the Song dynasty ci poetry is an important part of its evolution throughout the ages. Xie demonstrates how Liu Yong created an image of the Song capital through his ci works that were written at the behest of the emperor himself, works that were descriptions of life in the capital, and works remembering his personal experiences in the capital after he had moved away. While Liu’s portrayal of Bianjing lacks novelty in terms of basic themes and content, his structural skills shine through in his creative and charming descriptions of minutia such as weather and walking. Liu’s ci works do not focus on the spatial characteristics of the capital city, but rather emphasize the passage of time and physical experiences. Through his ci works, we can see a shift of his own purpose in composing capital literature, from “creating an authoritative space” to “expressing a particular style.”

The final article is Ding Fang’s 丁放 “The Development of Ci Poetry Criticism in Song Literary Miscellanies: an Evaluation of Li Yu, Liu Yong, and Su Shi.” Ding explores how the field of ci literary theory was brought about in the Song dynasty by analyzing how ci poets and their work were received by other literati in their same era. From the literary journals of Song dynasty scholars we discover that Li Yu 李煜 (937–978) was thought of as the first minister ci poet; Liu Yong was thought of as an innovator in rhetorical technique; and Su Shi was thought of as an innovator in style and theme. Through such commentaries, we can put together a preliminary understanding of how Song dynasty scholars saw the emergence and development of ci as an entire literary genre. Also looking at Song scholars’ miscellanies as a whole, we can make the following observations: since the country was relatively peaceful and prosperous, the scholarly class grew a general fondness for ci poetry; New Confucianism was the dominant philosophy at that time, and this found its way into ci poetry works as well as the criticism thereof; the scholarly (and ministerial) class had a clear preference for “higher” tastes as opposed to vulgar or popular forms of expression; and finally, Song scholars were quite interested in ci poetry in general and had a lot to say about this burgeoning form of literature.