Endnotes
PROLOGUE
1 Simon Leys, âVictor Hugoâ, in The Hall of Uselessness, Melbourne: Black Inc., 2011, p. 60. This essay first appeared in the New York Review of Books, 17 December 1998, then in The Angel and the Octopus: Collected Essays 1983â1998, Sydney: Duffy & Snellgrove, 1999.
2 In an editorial published the day after the sinologistâs death, the Australian rightly highlighted the fact that Pierre Ryckmans approached whatever he was studying âas a scholar, but also with something of the wonder of a childâ. See âDragon Slayer Guided by Beautyâ, Australian, 13 August 2014.
3 Li Bai, âThoughts on a Still Nightâ. The poem is one Ryckmans himself studied when he began learning Chinese, as is revealed in an exercise book of his that his brother Jean-Marie has kept.
4 Leys, âVictor Hugoâ, op. cit., p. 59.
5 See, for instance, âZhongxi huihua jiben yuanze zhi bijiao jiqi jiechu guochengâ (A comparison between the fundamental principles of Chinese and Western painting) or âChengxiang qihou de yinxiangpaiâ (A study of impressionism). These articles were published in 1963 and 1964 respectively in Hong Kong university journals.
6 Pierre Ryckmans writing as Li Keman, Xiao yu de xingfu (The Happiness of Small Fry), Shanghai: Wenyi chubanshe, 2014.
7 Leys, Other Peopleâs Thoughts, Melbourne: Black Inc., 2007, pp. 7â8.
8 Leys didnât welcome the present biographical project without some misgivings: âI donât think the subject is interesting enough. Honestly. I hope my little books can be of a certain interest (I wouldnât publish them otherwise). But myself as a person ⌠No, I canât see it.â (Letter to the author, 26 November 2010; the emphasis is Leysâs.)
9 Nicolas Cavaillès, âPrĂŠfaceâ, in Ămile Cioran, Ĺuvres, Paris: Gallimard, âBibliothèque de la PlĂŠiadeâ, 2011, p. xi.
10 Pierre Mertens, âRĂŠception de Simon Leys. SĂŠance publique du 30 mai 1992â, Brussels: ARLLFB, pp. 1â2; available online at: www.arllfb.be.
11 Ryckmans, âLa Chine comme anti-Egypteâ, Revue des Deux Mondes, September 2013, p. 127. Leys developed this approach in his introduction to With Stendhal, Melbourne: Black Inc., 2010, p. 3.
12 The historical existence of Confucius is not contested, but the dates of his birth and death (551â479 BC) are uncertain.
13 Leys, âAn Introduction to Confuciusâ, in The Hall of Uselessness, op. cit., p. 274. This study was the subject of a paper given at the 4 November 1995 sitting of the ARLLFB. It then served as an introduction to the English translation of The Analects of Confucius.
14 Ryckmans, âIntroduction du traducteurâ, in Les Entretiens de Confucius, Paris: Gallimard, âConnaissance de lâOrientâ, 1987, p. 7.
15 For an outline of the extremely different interpretations of certain passages in the Analects, see the review, âWhat Confucius Saidâ, which the American sinologist Jonathan Spence did of Simon Leysâs English translation â âclear and elegantâ â in the New York Review of Books, 10 April 1997.
16 Ryckmans, âIntroduction du traducteurâ, op. cit., p. 8
17 Jacques Gernet, âThe Analects of Confucius by Simon Leys (Les Entretiens de Confucius, par Pierre Ryckmans)â, Tâoung Pao, 2nd series, vol. 85, nos 4â5, 1999, pp. 438, 440â441.
18 (RenĂŠ) Ătiemble, in Leys, Les Entretiens de Confucius, op. cit., back cover. Kong Zi is the Chinese name for Confucius.
19 Quoted in M. Van Nieuwenborgh, âLa Chine ne se rĂŠsignera jamais Ă respecter les droits de lâhommeâ, Le VifâLâExpress, 9 May 2008.
20 Anne Cheng, âThe Analects of Confucius by Simon Leysâ, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, vol. 62, no. 2, 1999, p. 387. Leys, for his part, considered Anne Chengâs French translation of the Analects (Paris: Ăditions du Seuil, 1981, reprinted in the âPointsâ collection) to be âone of the most seriousâ, but thought that âthe wording could be improvedâ (interview with the author, Canberra, 28 March 2014).
21 Alice W. Cheng, âTranslating and Interpreting the Analects of Confuciusâ, Review of Politics, vol. 62, no. 3, Summer 2000, p. 577.
22 Leys, âAn Introduction to Confuciusâ, op. cit., pp. 271â272.
23 ibid., p. 276.
24 ibid., p. 276.
25 Claude Roy, âConfucius rajeuniâ, Le Monde, 27 November 1987.
26 Leys, âForewordâ, in The Analects of Confucius, New York: W.W. Norton, 1997, p. xi. Leys attacked Arthur Waleyâs well-known translation for containing âsome rather flagrant mistakes and several debatable interpretationsâ but found it âwritten in an admirable Englishâ, whereas the translation of D.C. Lau, âmore reliable philologicallyâ, gave the impression of being âcomposed on a computer, by a computerâ. (Leys, âThe Experience of Literary Translationâ, in The Hall of Uselessness, op. cit.,...