This dissertation aims to investigate the cross-genre writing of 《Tung-Hsien Ci》 among prose, Fu (poetry) and Qu (poetry). In terms of turning the prose into “Ci (poetry),” it discusses the grand style of Chia-Hsuan Ci, mixed with prose syntaxes. As for the turning from Fu to Qu, this article chooses the Ci of Elegant Cial School in Song Dynasty as a contrast to Tung-Hsien Ci. Although there are differences in terms of the style between the two, both of them are mainly chant.
Dealing with the turning of Ci to Qu, taking the Ci of Ming Dynasty and Tung Hsien Ci for example , this essay also explores that whether the writing between Ci and Qu was valuable or not. There were many factors result in the confusion between Ci and Qu, for Ming Dynasty. Writing Ci in Qu was another way, or it would injure the vitality of Ci, which would be worthy of investigating.
The second chapter is to investigate the features and value in prose sentence Cis. However, most critics still think that it is unorthodox to writing Ci in prose, and difficult to interpret the gloomy and mildly style of Ci. Even the genius such as Chia-Hsuan has still been blamed. Although Ting-zhuo Chen and Zhou-yi Kuang admire the verve and refining of Chia-Hsuan Ci, they treat him as a special case. They think that no profound scholarship is enough to learn Chia-Hsuan Ci, especially Shih-Chuan Chiang, who is considered to imitate Chia-Hsuan Ci, but only dross. Therefore, I will arrange Chia-Hsuan Ci and Shih-Chuan Chiang’s Ci to the same column in the chapter, and analyse the characteristics and defects of Tung-Hsien Ci from the point of view of writing Ci in prose. The third chapter is to emphasize the technique of Fu by Shih-Chuan Chiang. There are many chanting things Ci and written on paintings Cis in Tung-Hsien Ci, this themes most can show the skill of the poet’s depiction and description. I will compare Tung-Hsien Ci and Mei-Xi, Meng-chuang, Bi-shan’s chanting things Cis, this shows that both Chanting Things, why predecessors slightly better. Predecessors master the soul of Ci, without it, depiction is poor. Shih-Chuan Chiang’s chanting things Cis giving people a frivolous impression, especially he often uses anecdotes and legends as allusions, this is similar to the South Song poets, but Shih-Chuan Chiang use allusions incongruously. Most of the allusions he has used come from history books and unofficial history. This means that he may show off the intent of learning. The fourth chapter pay attention to Shih-Chuan Chiang’s style of writing Ci in Qu. Shih-Chuan Chiang is a drama writer, he is just like Shao-Xin Shi, Xian-Zu Tang and Yu Lee. They write Ci accompanied by Qu style, but I think that industry specializing in surgery. A drama writer writing Ci in Qu causes people to be confused with Ci and Qu. If literature loses its significance, this behavior is putting the cart before the horse. Although, since the Ming Dynasty, there is a tendency that Qu is often merged into Ci in the early Qing Dynasty. After worthies and Yi-zun Zhu drastic reforms, Shih-Chuan Chiang still writes Ci in Qu. This makes me associate to his identity as a drama writer. The fifth chapter will integrate the features of Tung-Hsien Ci , and will induct contribution and missing to the history of literature, looking forward to the fair criticism of Tung-Hsien Ci.