Working with the Shorter Columbia Anthology Of Traditional Chinese Literature
I picked up a second-hand copy of the shorter Columbia anthology last year for a graduate seminar I was cross-registering for. The professor wanted us to read certain Tang dynasty poems alongside their critical commentaries, and the book sat on my desk for three weeks before I actually opened it past the table of contents. That’s not unusual for me with these massive reference volumes. The Shorter Columbia Anthology Of Traditional Chinese Literature is essentially the abridged companion to the two-volume Columbia Anthology of Traditional Chinese Literature edited by Victor H. Mair. It covers roughly the same ground, from the pre-Qin period through the late imperial era, but it trims the translator's notes and the secondary criticism considerably. The text translations themselves are solid—Mair assembled a reliable team including William Nienhauser and others—but the shorter version sacrifices a lot of the apparatus that makes the full anthology useful for serious study. The practical reality is this. If you're taking an introductory survey course, this book will serve you. If you're doing actual research or need to understand the interpretive debates around a passage, you're going to hit the walls of this edition pretty quickly. I learned that the hard way when I was trying to work through Du Fu's "Spring View" and realized the annotation simply didn't go deep enough for what I needed.
The main structural issue with the shorter anthology is its editorial decisions about what gets included and what gets cut. The Table of Contents looks impressive, but when you actually go to read a specific poet or genre, you'll notice significant gaps. The Han dynasty fu literature is drastically reduced. The medieval Buddhist translation literature that appears in the full set gets almost no representation here. And certain important women writers, like Xue Tao, get a single poem instead of the five or six that would give you a real sense of their range. For someone actually trying to learn classical Chinese rather than just reading English translations, the approach here is adequate but limited. The pinyin transliterations are helpful in the early sections, but they disappear almost entirely after the introductory chapters. You won't find character-by-character glossaries the way you do in Stephen Owen's translation projects. The footnotes focus on historical context rather than philological detail. This is fine if your goal is literary appreciation. It's a problem if your goal is close reading. I ran into a specific issue last semester that illustrates the limitation clearly. I was comparing two different translations of a Shi Jing poem, and the anthology's version had simplified the grammatical particles in a way that made the emotional register read completely flat. The full Columbia edition's notes would have flagged this as a known interpretive controversy and offered the alternative reading. The shorter version just presented its translation as if it were definitive. I had to go to JSTOR and pull two secondary sources just to verify that the poem had multiple legitimate interpretations.
The pagination is also worth noting. Some of the longer narrative texts get compressed in ways that actually distort their structure. A story from the Shuo Yuan that runs four pages in the original gets trimmed to one page here, and the narrative logic becomes harder to follow because transitional material is removed. This isn't a criticism of the editors so much as a description of what any abbreviated anthology must do. If you need the full apparatus, the two-volume Columbia Anthology remains the gold standard. It costs about forty dollars more and takes up significantly more shelf space, but the annotations, the bibliographic essays at the beginning of each section, and the extensive index make it worth the investment if you're serious about the material. I've used both and the difference is not marginal. For casual reading or classroom use, the shorter anthology is perfectly serviceable. The English is generally readable and the selections are representative of the major genres. Just be aware of what you're getting when you choose it over the complete version. The cuts are real, not cosmetic.
Get the Full Details
