i refuse to believe mxtx has not listened to at least one or both of the songs 'viva la vida' by coldplay, and 'pompeii' by bastille. i refuse

TGCF and the Detachment from Outcomes

in Buddhism, detachment refers to the relinquishing of attachment to desires and the outcomes of actions. it is the understanding that attachment leads to suffering. (re: suffering, i have also written a meta about it in relation to the pursuit of dreams in TGCF.)

it seems paradoxical to say that given dreams are what we use to makes sense of our suffering and create meaning for our life, we should detach ourselves from it, especially since Xie Lian stubbornly persists in (which has the connotation of latching onto) his dream, and so does Hua Cheng, whose obsession maintains his existence after his death. but there is a nuanced distinction between deeply engaging with the process of chasing one’s dream and not caring about the outcome of it. i would like to argue that both Hua Cheng and Xie Lian don’t “care” about their dreams in this latter regard, and that the crown prince of Wuyong’s downfall lies with him caring too much.

starting with Hua Cheng, in being Xie Lian’s most devoted believer, he does not expect any reciprocation on Xie Lian’s part. even though Xie Lian is his dream, he does not care about whether he “achieves” his dream or not. he does not allow his sense of fulfillment to depend on the extrinsic nature of what his god could give him in return, though of course, he would be extra happy if Xie Lian did acknowledge him, the key is that he does not depend on it to motivate himself. instead, he is good to Xie Lian, respects his wishes such as praying without kneeling, develops himself to be strong enough so that he can protect his god.

moving on to Xie Lian, there are two lines from the novel that stood out to me:

1. from when xie lian was conversing with Ban Yue outside Puqi Shrine, 【This phrase [that his dream is to save the common people] was clearly his favorite before he turned seventeen. In the centuries that followed, he shouldn't have mentioned it at all!】

2. during the ultimate battle with Jun Wu, and actually throughout his history with Bai Wuxiang, 【He's probably right. Xie Lian cannot win. But even if he can't win, he must fight!】

it doesn’t matter if he can’t win, doesn’t matter if he can’t “achieve” his dream, the important thing is in trying itself, in which Xie Lian no longer talks the talk of “i want to save the common people!” but instead embodies it, taking action in saving people whenever he gets the opportunity. his dream ceases to be a distant outcome but a way of living.

in contrast, the crown prince of Wuyong was adamant about sacrificing people, albeit criminals, into the kiln in order to stop the volcano from erupting, because he was attached to the outcome of saving the common people as well as the image of a god who never fails. in order to achieve this outcome and sustain his image, he gradually deviated from his principles, saying that he wants to save people while killing them. (i will not personally assert that this is wrong, though, because this is just a utilitarian framework of ethics, and i believe that people are free to adhere to their own ethical frameworks without any standard being intrinsically more valuable than another, but i will say that under TGCF’s narrative, Jun Wu’s actions seem to be at odds with his ideals, which is what led to his dissonance and dichotomy.)

by the way, i don’t think this analysis would be possible under the old version of TGCF, because while i can sense that a deontological/Kantian argument is what the story hints at given the two lines i quoted above, Xie Lian at times expresses inconsistent standards. i do not wish to get into this, mainly because back then it gave me a headache. just know that in the revised version, 1. Xie Lian did not kill any soldiers in the Yong’an war and 2. Xie Lian did not kill Lang Qianqiu’s parents.