A Video Walkthrough of an Archery Ritual from Beijing Hanfu Association

As mentioned in 2009 on this blog in detail regarding the logistics and music (and more) of the She Li, or Archery Ritual, here is a detailed, half-hour special produced by our friends in Beijing Hanfu Association on the rundown of the ritual itself.

The language spoken is Mandarin, but we have (painstakingly) annotated the entire episode on Youtube, in the English language.

盡我綿薄之力﹐復我禮義之邦﹗
Let us make our small contribution, to revive our Nation of Rituals and Righteousness!

About these ads

7 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. asdf
    Nov 23, 2011 @ 00:10:08

    hanfu enthusiasts should really start paying more attention to architecture. Ceremonies like these are best presented in front of han/tang dynasty style buildings. After the yuan dynasty, authentic han characteristics in chinese architecture became heavily diluted.

    Reply

    • Satsuki Shizuka 五月靜
      Nov 23, 2011 @ 11:18:40

      That is the case in China now, although I highly doubt getting replicas of Han/Tang architecture would solve much. First of all, these designs take much more wood compared to later designs, causing deforestation – something Shaanxi Province has learned painfully since the 900′s. Besides, Song/Ming architecture is a significant change of aesthetic tastes in Chinese society because of regional focus shifts.

      Ultimately, I wouldn’t advise on getting stuck with period concepts. Like the clothing, we should view from a holistic perspective of Chinese culture and not get caught up in particular “dynastic periods”.

      And let’s not begin to count how many OTHER arts that deserve “more attention”…

      Reply

  2. asdf
    Nov 24, 2011 @ 16:24:39

    I can also say that Qipao and Tangzhuang are a significant change of aesthetic tastes. Hanfu is only a period concept. Hanfu takes more cloth compared to later designs.

    If the purpose of the movement is to promote han culture, then the we should undo the negative effects of foreign occupation. Changes in song dynasty architecture are acceptable because these changes were naturally evolved or caused by foreign INFLUENCE (meaning we chose to include certain elements of other cultures because we liked it). Architecture after the yuan dynasty changed due to foreign SUPPRESSION (meaning we had no choice and were were forced to change the architecture or convinced to change the architecture due to a forced shift in cultural values and general aesthetic taste)

    We should revive pre-yuan dynasty architecture for the sake of reviving architecture. It doesn’t need to “solve” anything else. I’m not advocating the destruction of all Qing/Ming dynasty buildings. That too would be a huge loss.

    The clothing and architecture in that video just didn’t fit together. It’s like wearing roman clothing in front of a Medieval castle. Both are examples of European culture. but they shouldn’t be mixed together.

    Reply

    • Satsuki Shizuka 五月靜
      Nov 24, 2011 @ 19:56:15

      >> “Hanfu is only a period concept.”

      That’s all I needed to hear, and that’s where you’ve totally missed the point. Yes, we’re aware that no matter it’s architecture, clothing, or otherwise, there’s been foreign influence, but the point in its revival today is not to reinstill a timeframe — this is a common misinterpretation of the Confucian concept of restorationalism.

      Unless you can provide concrete examples of how Mongolian oppression changed Chinese architecture, it would be difficult to backtrack and restore traditional roots. Take for example the Yesa robe — it evolved from the Mongol Jisun robe, and it became a common courier dress by the Ming with some major modifications. While we strongly remember and acknoledge its origins, it’s (a little arguably) now recognized full-on as Hanfu, of genuine innovation by Han Chinese.

      If you feel that the architecture didn’t fit in, you might as well question the people in slacks and jerseys…or that they’re wearing spectacles, made of high-tech non-reflective material at that. No, I am not suggesting that they remove them, I am suggesting that you need to look at their expression of Chinese-ness not from an attempt at “restoring Song/Ming”, but “creating a Huaxia future”, which is bound together with whatever images of Chinese-ness they have within their grasp.

      Reply

      • asdf
        Nov 25, 2011 @ 02:10:41

        no i cannot provide concrete examples of how Mongolian oppression changed Chinese architecture. you know what it doesn’t even matter how it changed. All i need to provide is the obvious FACT THAT THE ARCHITECTURE CHANGED. and if you’re going to wear hanfu from before the yuan dynasty, you should also use architecture from before the yuan dynasty. or else it looks retarded. pointing out stuff about glasses or people in t-shirts is just being picky. glasses are there to correct vision, ppl in t-shirts just don’t have hanfu. no big deal. the props/costumes don’t need to be COMPLETE, but they need to be CORRECT.
        ok maybe my roman/medieval example was too extreme. this is more like mixing up midieval and victorian era architecture and clothing together. the changes between those periods were natural. there was no foreign oppression between these two eras, but getting the two mixed up in one scene would still be rather embarrassing.

        Reply

  3. asdf
    Nov 25, 2011 @ 02:46:38

    nvm i got carried away with my argument they WERE wearing ming hanfu. fuuuuuuuuu
    remove my last comment thx LOL

    Reply

  4. 汉人
    Dec 29, 2013 @ 08:36:19

    I think we could revive “Han/Tang” style architecture without the excessive amount of wood. Do you agree? We can adapt it to be less excessive in resources. There might be a need to standardize a lot of things, thus taking away dynastic characteristics, leaving those in the history books. I think modern Chinese architecture is rather bland and little too similar to what I see in the West…and any country for that matter…it’s like architects nowadays have no ethnic identities and are bent on creating the same things based on Modern (Western) standards. Wouldn’t it be glorious to fly into China and see something completely different? Imagine airports that follow Traditional Han architecture. There are so many things we could do if only the architects could be persuaded.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

October 2011
M T W T F S S
« Sep   Nov »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 751 other followers

%d bloggers like this: