Scan barcode
megobrien's review
4.0
A book I will keep accessible to reference and reread.
I enjoyed Ursula's notations and commentaries at the bottom of some passages. Comparing her translation of these texts with others, I much prefer hers for the added sense of humor and levity. Particularly, in "The Uses of Not", which was my favorite Chapter.
I enjoyed Ursula's notations and commentaries at the bottom of some passages. Comparing her translation of these texts with others, I much prefer hers for the added sense of humor and levity. Particularly, in "The Uses of Not", which was my favorite Chapter.
hanawulu's review
3.0
My favorite part of this version of the book was the end where Ursula Le Guin talks more about the differences between the various translations and the types of issues she ran into comparing versions.
It is humbling to read words from so many years ago and think about the same questions of how to live still resonate.
It is humbling to read words from so many years ago and think about the same questions of how to live still resonate.
omnibozo22's review
5.0
Hadn't read Lao Tzu in a long time, and never this version. Enjoyed it a lot. If Dumbtruck could read, he'd be amazed to find himself in the text, many times and never in a good way.
Le Guin doesn't read Chinese, as she explains in the notes, but she examined many different translations over time, and reworked them to make sense to her. The result is very readable.
"The disordered society if full of loyal patriots."
"Acting simply
True leaders are hardly known to their followers.
Next after them are the leaders the people know and admire;
after them, those they fear;
after them, those they despise.
To give no trust is to get no trust.
When the work's done right,
with no fuss or boasting,
ordinary people say,
Oh, we did it."
Le Guin doesn't read Chinese, as she explains in the notes, but she examined many different translations over time, and reworked them to make sense to her. The result is very readable.
"The disordered society if full of loyal patriots."
"Acting simply
True leaders are hardly known to their followers.
Next after them are the leaders the people know and admire;
after them, those they fear;
after them, those they despise.
To give no trust is to get no trust.
When the work's done right,
with no fuss or boasting,
ordinary people say,
Oh, we did it."
loppear's review
4.0
Beautiful poetic interpretation, just enough word choice footnotes to remind you of the underlying ambiguity throughout.
octoberdad's review
4.0
I read this as part of my research for a paper I'm will be presenting on Le Guin's [b:The Left Hand of Darkness|18423|The Left Hand of Darkness (Hainish Cycle, #4)|Ursula K. Le Guin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1388229638s/18423.jpg|817527] in January at Mythmoot III. I was surprised to find how short the book is, and was able to read it in one sitting — though, having done so, I suspect it is not the intended method of consumption. It seems better suited to small, daily chunks for rumination or meditation. It's unlikely that I will read it in that manner, but I suspect I will revisit it a couple times in the next month or so.
Overall, I quite enjoyed it. I read more for feeling than sense, and Le Guin's brief, sporadic commentaries seem to uphold such a reading. Much of it is the sort of short, enigmatic, oscillating verse that one might expect, but I was surprised to find how much of it is fairly comprehensible. Indeed, there's plenty of strangeness and a tendency toward epigrammatic enigma, but on the whole there's a simplicity to the sensibleness of many of the verses. It's hard to say how much of that is inherent in the text itself, and how much of it is Le Guin's rendering. She warns, in her notes at the end, that she did not translate it, but created her own version based on a dozen or so prior translations that she has studied over many years, working on it bit by bit, sometimes with decade-long hiatuses.
Anyway, if I have one criticism, it's in a single comment she makes on chapter 53, "Insight," the last stanza of which reads:
Le Guin's comment: "So much for capitalism."
*sigh*
The obvious reply here is that when Lau Tzu (or whomever) wrote this, capitalism wasn't "a thing," so to call out capitalism in response to these statements is disingenuous at best. More to the point, the text seems to indicate that these things are not "the way" regardless of the political and economic situation one finds themselves. (In the prior stanza, there is a reference to splendiferous palaces, which seems distinctly anti-capitalist to me.) The idea that ornamentalism, ostentatiousness, warmongering, gluttony, greed and theft are solely the products of capitalism is simply absurd.
In fact, there are other moments in Le Guin's commentary that seem to favor capitalist — in particular, anarcho-capitalist — ideals. The author "sees sacrifice of the self or others as a corruption of power," she writes in her comment on chapter 13, "Shameless." "This is a radically subversive attitude. No wonder anarchists and Taoists make good friends." This idea is cognate with modern libertarian attitudes against so-called "crony capitalism," which is an oxymoron insofar as it isn't truly capitalism but more like fascism (in the original sense of the word). In chapter 57, "Being simple," are found the lines:
Le Guin's comment, in part, is, "No pessimist would say that people are able to look after themselves, be just, and prosper on their own. No anarchist can be a pessimist." Again, this fits well with libertarian/capitalist viewpoints. It was, after all, [a:Adam Smith|14424|Adam Smith|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1244624882p2/14424.jpg], the patron saint of capitalism, who wrote, "We may often fulfill all the roles of justice by sitting still and doing nothing."
Perhaps I've ranted too long. Overall I quite enjoyed the work. And bonus: I even found some stuff to use for my paper on Left Hand....
Edit: I feel compelled to add that I realize Le Guin's definition of anarchism is likely not anarcho-capitalism but rather anarcho-syndicalism. I mean, I have read [b:The Dispossessed|13651|The Dispossessed (Hainish Cycle, #5)|Ursula K. Le Guin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1353467455s/13651.jpg|2684122]. Still, my objections stand.
Overall, I quite enjoyed it. I read more for feeling than sense, and Le Guin's brief, sporadic commentaries seem to uphold such a reading. Much of it is the sort of short, enigmatic, oscillating verse that one might expect, but I was surprised to find how much of it is fairly comprehensible. Indeed, there's plenty of strangeness and a tendency toward epigrammatic enigma, but on the whole there's a simplicity to the sensibleness of many of the verses. It's hard to say how much of that is inherent in the text itself, and how much of it is Le Guin's rendering. She warns, in her notes at the end, that she did not translate it, but created her own version based on a dozen or so prior translations that she has studied over many years, working on it bit by bit, sometimes with decade-long hiatuses.
Anyway, if I have one criticism, it's in a single comment she makes on chapter 53, "Insight," the last stanza of which reads:
People wearing ornaments and fancy clothes, carrying weapons,
drinking a lot and eating a lot,
having a lot of things, a lot of money:
shameless thieves.
Surely their way
isn't the way.
Le Guin's comment: "So much for capitalism."
*sigh*
The obvious reply here is that when Lau Tzu (or whomever) wrote this, capitalism wasn't "a thing," so to call out capitalism in response to these statements is disingenuous at best. More to the point, the text seems to indicate that these things are not "the way" regardless of the political and economic situation one finds themselves. (In the prior stanza, there is a reference to splendiferous palaces, which seems distinctly anti-capitalist to me.) The idea that ornamentalism, ostentatiousness, warmongering, gluttony, greed and theft are solely the products of capitalism is simply absurd.
In fact, there are other moments in Le Guin's commentary that seem to favor capitalist — in particular, anarcho-capitalist — ideals. The author "sees sacrifice of the self or others as a corruption of power," she writes in her comment on chapter 13, "Shameless." "This is a radically subversive attitude. No wonder anarchists and Taoists make good friends." This idea is cognate with modern libertarian attitudes against so-called "crony capitalism," which is an oxymoron insofar as it isn't truly capitalism but more like fascism (in the original sense of the word). In chapter 57, "Being simple," are found the lines:
The more restrictions and prohibitions in the world,
the poorer people get
...
So a wise leader might say:
I practice inaction, and the people look after themselves.
I love to be quiet, and the people themselves find justice.
Le Guin's comment, in part, is, "No pessimist would say that people are able to look after themselves, be just, and prosper on their own. No anarchist can be a pessimist." Again, this fits well with libertarian/capitalist viewpoints. It was, after all, [a:Adam Smith|14424|Adam Smith|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1244624882p2/14424.jpg], the patron saint of capitalism, who wrote, "We may often fulfill all the roles of justice by sitting still and doing nothing."
Perhaps I've ranted too long. Overall I quite enjoyed the work. And bonus: I even found some stuff to use for my paper on Left Hand....
Edit: I feel compelled to add that I realize Le Guin's definition of anarchism is likely not anarcho-capitalism but rather anarcho-syndicalism. I mean, I have read [b:The Dispossessed|13651|The Dispossessed (Hainish Cycle, #5)|Ursula K. Le Guin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1353467455s/13651.jpg|2684122]. Still, my objections stand.
emilyolivemoore's review
the most valuable part of this book for me was reading Le Guin's explanations for her choices, and the extensive list of translations she referenced. Having said that I do prefer Stephen Mitchell's translation.
uniskorn's review
5.0
I think it's important to note that Ursula K. Le Guin didn't translate this book--she says her self in it that she doesn't speak Chinese. Rather, she comments on the passages. Her comments are very helpful in understanding or gaining insight to what Lao Tzu means.
There are several poems in this book that brought me peace to read and help me understand the nature of the individual, whether it be in the political realm, the egotistical realm, etc. More importantly, it allowed me to understand the nature of inner peace and how to attain it.
The Way is still something very mysterious to me. It's attained by not doing (which is a-doing in itself). There are a lot of contradictions that appear in this book and Lao Tzu plays off of them. Truly nature in itself is a contradiction. The wildfire destroys but the wildfire also brings growth, for instance.
A very fast read, but in the same vein, it could take you a long while to read if you wish to ponder the poems more, which, if I ever read this again, would be my next route.
There are several poems in this book that brought me peace to read and help me understand the nature of the individual, whether it be in the political realm, the egotistical realm, etc. More importantly, it allowed me to understand the nature of inner peace and how to attain it.
The Way is still something very mysterious to me. It's attained by not doing (which is a-doing in itself). There are a lot of contradictions that appear in this book and Lao Tzu plays off of them. Truly nature in itself is a contradiction. The wildfire destroys but the wildfire also brings growth, for instance.
A very fast read, but in the same vein, it could take you a long while to read if you wish to ponder the poems more, which, if I ever read this again, would be my next route.