Qi (奇) means surprise while zheng (正) means direct and normal. First advanced by Laozi, the concept has two main meanings. First, it is a military term about two opposing ways of fighting. Zheng means meeting the enemy head-on based on an understanding of its intention,while Qi means keeping one’s intention to oneself and launching surprise attack and laying ambush on the enemy in order to secure surprise victory. Zheng and qi need to be applied in a coordinated way. While a military term, qizheng is also used to deal with daily affairs. Second, as a term of literary and art criticism, it means an article is pure and original in terms of theme and elegant and stylish in terms of diction. Liu Xie (465? –520) of the Southern Dynasty first introduced qizheng in literary criticism to oppose attaching excessive importance to form and novelty, a trend which was popular in the literary circles in the Qi and Liang dynasties. Liu Xie maintained that literary creation should be based on Confucian classics in terms of theme, to be embellished by stylish rhetoric. He believed that pure thought (zheng) must come before rhetoric (qi) so that an essay would be original in terms of theme and beautiful but unexaggerated in terms of diction. The term qizheng was later also used in literary criticism of poetry and opera.
The term refers to the following six criteria on literary appreciation and criticism which are also six key elements in writing: structural layout of writing, choice of words to construct sentences, acceptance and innovation in the style of earlier writers, inheriting and transforming traditional ways of expression, citing examples to support an argument, and musical rhythm. As a school of literary criticism, the six criteria formed a key component in the theoretical system established in The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons. The six criteria offered rules that could be followed to avoid subjectivity in literary criticism. They also provided a framework of theoretical guidance for later generations of critics and exerted significant influence on the development of literary theory in modern times.
Jing (经),which means the constant, and quan (权), which means the temporary, are terms used in the historical discourse of Chinese philosophy referring to a pair of philosophical concepts concerning the permanent and temporarily changing aspects of dao. The constant is the normal manifestation of human relations and daily life. It is thus the normal way that should be observed. It has normative functions and significance. The temporary means a change of the function of dao to suit circumstances or to meet needs of the day. In special circumstances, to follow the constant may result in deviation from dao. When this happens, a flexible way, that is, the temporary, may be adopted. The temporary seems to deviate from dao, but it actually conforms to requirements of dao in a flexible manner. The application of the constant or the temporary in different circumstances is determined by one’s keen understanding and mastery of dao.
This term means one should not only have a good command of the basic rules that govern things, but also know how to deal with exceptional situations or problems in a flexible manner. It suggests that one should not just adhere to principles, but also act according to circumstances. Chang (常permanence) and bian (变change) are two opposing concepts in ancient Chinese philosophy. The nature of things that decides what they are, and their basic rules or general principles that are relatively stable are called chang (permanence); but when it comes to specific situations or ways to deal with them, they are different and change in different circumstances, thus they are called bian (change). Relative to change, permanence is what endures within change. Permanence is fundamental while change is a deviation. Therefore, one needs not only to have a good command of the basic rules and general principles of things, but also know how to apply these rules and principles in a flexible manner according to objective circumstances. The mastery of both permanence and change reflects ancient Chinese people’s perception of both generality and particularity as well as principles and flexibility. It also shows their methodology in the application of both.