The Confusions of Pleasures by Timothy Brook asks: what is pleasure for Confucians? Brook was trained in English literature at the University of Toronto, completed a master’s in East Asia Regional Studies at Harvard University, and then a PhD in East Asian Languages and History under the tutelage of Philip A. Kuhn. Other research by Brook examines inter-polity relations and connects China’s presence in the world. Notable recent works include: Completing the Map of the World: Cartographic Interaction between China and Europe (2020), Great State: China and the world (2019), Sacred Mandates: Asian International Relations since Chinggis Khan (2018). The Confusions of Pleasures, published in 1998, is among his earlier works that focus on the inner workings of Ming China, including Culture and Economy: The Shaping of Capitalism in Eastern Asia (1997), Civil Society in China (1997), and China and Historical Capitalism: Genealogies of Sinological Knowledge (1999). This book embraces Brook’s literary training and melds a dialogue with the editor of a gazetteer to weigh in on Confucian morals, commerce, and social status in Ming dynasty China (1368-1644).
Brook challenges the trope that the rising merchant class broke the social hierarchy that protected the gentry, therefore dismantled the stability of the last dynasty of China for the elite. Brook unfolds his thesis through engaging with Zhang Tao, a county magistrate of Sheh county, south of Nanjing, who penned the local gazetteer that was launched in 1609. Utilizing microhistory, the book fosters empathy for the gentry class seduced by conspicuous consumption that is fueled by silver and merchants through vivid and meticulous details. However, Brook confronts Zhang’s assertions by revealing that the gentry class survived interdynastic conflict through keeping up appearances (P. 206) and the liquidity of silver enabled gentry to capture commercial opportunities for survival (P.210), therefore the compression of social hierarchy strengthened rather than weakened the gentry’s power (P. 212). The thrust of the argument is made at the end of the book, which illustrates the continuity and “fixity” of gentry power relative to merchants as they successfully adapted to maintain their position “in a commercial economy, [where] the reality of elite status is that rungs on the ladder break easily” (P. 216). Thus, the gentry class perpetuated an image of adherence to Confucian morals in order to capitalize on soft power and connections inaccessible to non-gentry. The outward projection creates confusion and tension because while valuing hierarchy, morals, and ritual, the gentry class must now collaborate with the once disdained merchant class, succumb to bribery (P. 114), and use funerals as theatrics to “buy status and set the wealthy apart” (P. 135). The strain on the gentry’s identity is captured by the story of a bondservant who dismissed a gentleman’s complaint as he sat in a position that appears to be superior: “You’re getting all the breeze you want, why fuss if I happen to be sitting in the master’s place and you in the servants?” (P. 213). In essence, a trade off had to be made between Confucian values that offered psychological pleasure for adhering to a collective imagination and economic success that offered physical pleasure as well as psychological pleasure from pursuing individual desires.
The book contains four chapters: winter (1368-1450), spring (1450-1550), summer (1550-1644), and autumn (1642-1644). By organizing based on the seasons as a metaphor it frames each chapter in a standard plot arc of set up, rising action, climax, and falling action, but also mirrors the cyclical tendencies of Chinese dynasties. However, Brook clarifies the allusion to cyclic structure does not reflect Zhang Tao’s interpretation when evoking the seasons, because “they knew nothing of centuries (their larger unit for time reckoning was the sixty-year cycle),” thus Zhang did not consider cycles beyond his dynasty (Pp. 29-30). The artistic flare may potentially weaken Brook’s argument if the reader must restrain oneself from fitting Ming reality into Brook’s beguiling cyclical rebuttal against Zhang’s diatribe against commerce and decline of morals. The modern retrospective gaze cast upon Zhang minimizes his concerns, just as future historians may diminish today’s concerns about Trump, the orange lord of misinformation, on the institutions of democracy. It is only with hindsight that the larger cycle appears, but Zhang would not know if the gentry will survive in his day. Brooks thus puts words into Zhang’s mouth when he ends the book “perhaps Zhang was right: not to argue that commerce was evil and that China should revert to the wintery order of Emperor Hongwu, but to hope that the seasons would turn again, and in turning, reinstate the conservative values of patriarchy, hierarchy, and ruling-class justice that have sustained China’s social structure well beyond the Ming” (P. 218). The conclusion is baffling if Zhang has no perception of macrodynamics as Brook pointed out in the introduction. The choice of a cyclical season framework caused Brook to talk past Zhang instead of directly engaging in a “dialogue” (P. 27) on the concern of rupture, which centers on the future’s lack of antiquity, rather than decline, which assumes “cultural continuity throughout history” (Bol, P. 246). Brook admits the metaphor’s moral chronology is a common commodity among elite musings, such as Gu Yanwu (1613-1682), but reaches opposite conclusions (P. 211).
If the literary metaphor takes precedence over the overall concluding analysis, one must question whether each building block’s seasonal arcs were also constructed to fit Brook’s aesthetics rather than factual evidence. In the “winter” (1368-1450), the emphasis on Hongwu’s goal to immobilize his subjects (P. 34) is supported by anecdotes of wall building, traffic control, lijia system and careful census. However, Dardess in “Did the Mongols Matter” argues that several generations of officials of literati in the Song and Jin were necessary to form a “self-sustaining” and “self conscious” class (P. 128-9). In addition, Zhu Yuanzhang’s “warlord regime” was founded on “autocratic ideals” as a negative response to the Yuan (Dardess, P. 133); the same ideals were “invoked at many moments of crisis, as in 1468, 1519, 1525, and in the Donglin upheavals of 1620s” (Dardess, P. 133). Therefore, the “winter” of 82 years may also be reframed as feverish activity by the first several generations of gentry and merchants to establish their power base, which Brook casts as the “fall” season, when “[the year] 1644 wound the strands of the educated and moneyed elites more tightly together” (Brook, P.212). Furthermore, as a reactive response to the instability of Yuan, the elites of Ming may have counteracted in the opposite direction with forceful implementation of stability, but certainly not the inertia and complacency portrayed as a “winter of content” (Brook, P.34).
Apart from the flowery framework’s weakness in coherence with the broader historiography to transition from Yuan dynasty, Brook’s overarching thesis to refute Zhang Tao’s “attack” on commerce with “extreme tones” (Brook, P. 27) could have benefited from including analysis of literati peers that fomented local activism against the “imperial apparatus” (Bol, P. 283). The integration of Neo-Confucianism with the power of the state caused “the scion of a prominent literati family determined to restore its marginality” (Bol, P. 272), therefore the threat to traditional values came not only from the merchant class but within the gentry. The tension would cause real confusion among Confucians. The contribution of the book is perhaps not in establishing gentry’s role as “the ideological pillar of authoritarianism and elite resistance to change,” which is an unexceptional construct (Bol, P. 241), but the dramatic use of a man’s public writings to add nuance and mixed feelings toward the uneven acceptance of the commerce’s importance in daily life. It created empathy that allowed the reader to step into the shoes of Ming gentry class, as it had done in the preface with a humorous anecdote about Jean Nicolet’s misadventures. Similar to the anecdote, the book was pleasant to read, well paced with a well constructed plot. However, I don’t think the main characters would have been content with Brook’s portrayal of them as the negative example, given their historical circumstances.